Environment & Land Case E001 of 2023

Case Metadata
Case Number:	Environment & Land Case E001 of 2023
Parties:	Nyabola v Ochola
Date Delivered:	23 May 2023
Case Class:
Court:	Environment and Land Court at Siaya
Case Action:	Ruling
Judge(s):	Anne Yatich Koross
Citation:	Nyabola v Ochola (Environment & Land Case E001 of 2023) [2023] KEELC 17484 (KLR) (23 May 2023) (Ruling)
Advocates:	Mr. Ooro F. for Plaintiff, Mr. Otieno for Defendant
Court Division:	Environment and Land
County:	Siaya
Advocates:	Mr. Ooro F. for Plaintiff, Mr. Otieno for Defendant
Disclaimer:	The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Parties:

Nyabola v Ochola

Date Delivered:

23 May 2023

Case Class:

Court:

Environment and Land Court at Siaya

Case Action:

Ruling

Judge(s):

Anne Yatich Koross

Citation:

Nyabola v Ochola (Environment & Land Case E001 of 2023) [2023] KEELC 17484 (KLR) (23 May 2023) (Ruling)

Advocates:

Mr. Ooro F. for Plaintiff, Mr. Otieno for Defendant

Court Division:

Environment and Land

County:

Siaya

Advocates:

Mr. Ooro F. for Plaintiff, Mr. Otieno for Defendant

Disclaimer:

The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information

Nyabola v Ochola (Environment & Land Case E001 of 2023) [2023] KEELC 17484 (KLR) (23 May 2023) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 17484 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Environment and Land Court at Siaya

Environment & Land Case E001 of 2023

AY Koross, J

May 23, 2023

Between

Francis Ollaoh Nyabola

Plaintiff

and

Mary Atieno Ochola

Defendant

Ruling

1.Though the parties entered a consent on settlement of the case, they disagreed on costs. Both Counsels were in consensus that it is trite law that costs follow the event, it is discretory and the guiding provision of law is Section 27 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

2.The issue of contention between the parties was the intention of the plaintiff in filing the suit. He knew they are in-laws with a close family relationship. The issue could have been resolved amicably.

3.Having heard the counsels submissions, it is my considered view that it is settled law costs follow the event and the court has to consider the circumstances of each case in exercising its discretion. The plaintiff and defendant are close family relations and as this court has held in its previous decisions, in such special circumstances, each party shall bear their respective costs.

4.I hereby exercise my discretion and find that the parties herein shall bear their respective costs. It is so ordered.

5.The matter is marked as settled.

DELIVERED AND DATED AT SIAYA THIS 23^RD DAY OF MAY 2023.HON. A. Y. KOROSSJUDGE23/05/2023Ruling delivered in the Presence of:Mr. Ooro F. for the plaintiffMr. Otieno for the defendantCourt assistant: Ishmael Orwa

Case Content:		Subject:
Case Number:		Parties:
Judge:		Court:
	Delivery Date Range:
From:		To:

Case Search

Environment & Land Case E001 of 2023

Case Metadata

Please enter advanced search options