Nuru Chepleting Choge v Rajab Kipkosgei Magut & 2 others [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
S. M. Kibunja
Judgment Date
October 28, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
2

Case Brief: Nuru Chepleting Choge v Rajab Kipkosgei Magut & 2 others [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Nuru Chepleting Choge v. Rajab Kipkosgei Magut & Others
- Case Number: E & L Case No. 48 of 2019
- Court: Environment and Land Court of Kenya at Eldoret
- Date Delivered: 28th October 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): S. M. Kibunja
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issue in this case revolves around whether the 1st Defendant is entitled to costs following the Plaintiff's withdrawal of the suit. Specifically, the court must determine the appropriate procedure for applying for costs under the Civil Procedure Rules.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Plaintiff, Nuru Chepleting Choge, initiated the suit against the 1st Defendant, Rajab Kipkosgei Magut, along with the Uasin Gishu Land Registrar and the Hon. Attorney General as the 2nd and 3rd Defendants, respectively. The suit commenced on 5th April 2019, with the 1st Defendant entering appearance shortly thereafter. On 12th November 2019, the Plaintiff filed a notice to withdraw the suit against all Defendants. Following this withdrawal, the 1st Defendant filed a request for costs, which the Deputy Registrar endorsed. This procedural backdrop set the stage for the dispute over the entitlement to costs.

4. Procedural History:
The case progressed through several stages, starting with the Plaintiff filing a suit on 5th April 2019. After the Plaintiff’s withdrawal on 12th November 2019, the 1st Defendant filed a request for costs on 26th November 2019. The Deputy Registrar endorsed this request, leading to a dispute regarding whether the 1st Defendant could file a bill of costs without a formal application. The matter was brought before the court for directions on 21st September 2020, where Counsel for both parties presented their arguments regarding the costs.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court referenced Order 25 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which governs the withdrawal and discontinuance of suits. According to Rule 3, upon withdrawal, a defendant may apply for costs at the hearing. The rules stipulate that such applications should be made before the Deputy Registrar rather than a judge.
- Case Law: The court did not cite specific prior cases but relied on established procedural rules within the Civil Procedure framework. The emphasis was on the interpretation of the rules regarding the withdrawal of suits and the subsequent application for costs.
- Application: The court found that the 1st Defendant's request for costs was properly filed and endorsed by the Deputy Registrar. It ruled that the objection raised by the Plaintiff's Counsel regarding the procedure was misplaced, as the rules explicitly allow for such requests to be made to the Deputy Registrar. The court concluded that the 1st Defendant had incurred legitimate costs in defending the suit, warranting the taxation of the bill of costs.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled in favor of the 1st Defendant, affirming that they were entitled to costs following the Plaintiff's withdrawal of the suit. The court directed that the taxation of the bill of costs proceed before the Deputy Registrar, thereby clarifying the procedural requirements for applications for costs in withdrawn suits.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the ruling.

8. Summary:
The Environment and Land Court of Kenya ruled that the 1st Defendant is entitled to costs following the Plaintiff's withdrawal of the suit. This decision underscores the importance of adhering to procedural rules in civil litigation, particularly regarding the application for costs after withdrawal. The ruling clarifies the jurisdiction of the Deputy Registrar in matters concerning costs, reinforcing the procedural framework established by the Civil Procedure Rules.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Nuru-Chepleting-Choge-v-Rajab-Kipkosgei-Magut--2-others-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2527_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries