Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Election Petition 8 of 2013 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | JAMES KUYA EBEI v INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND BOUNDARIES COMMISSION & 2 others |
| Date Delivered: | 11 Jun 2013 |
| Case Class: | Civil |
| Court: | High Court at Kitale |
| Case Action: | |
| Judge(s): | A. MSHILA |
| Citation: | JAMES KUYA EBEI v INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND BOUNDARIES COMMISSION & 2 others [2013] eKLR |
| Case Summary: | Reported by Phoebe Ida Ayaya and Derrick Nzioka Electoral Law – election petition – deposit of costs – service – where the petitioner failed to deposit security for costs and effect service upon the respondents – where the respondents applied for the suit to be dismissed – whether the suit could be dismissed for want of prosecution – Elections Act, section 86(1); Election (Parliamentary and County Elections) Petition Rules, rule 4. |
| 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 |
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Kitale
Election Petition 8 of 2013
THE ELECTIONS ACT, 2011
JAMES KUYA EBEI................................................................................................PETITIONER
INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND BOUNDARIES COMMISSION.......1ST RESPONDENT
KIRORI KIMANI..........................................................................................2ND RESPONDENT
DANIEL NANOK EPUYO...........................................................................3RD RESPONDENT
1. The petitioner filed this petition on the 10th April, 2013. To date no payment has been made for security for costs nor has service been effected upon the respondents.
2. The 3rd respondent chose to move the court by way of Notice of Motion for dismissal of the petition.
3. The date for hearing of the application was taken in court and all counsel were present
4. On the 28th May, 2013, the application proceeded for hearing in the absence of the petitioner and his counsel, as counsel had due notice.
5. Having failed to deposit the requisite security for costs and having failed to effect service upon the respondents, this court finds that the petitioner is not desirous in prosecuting the petition.
6. The petition is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution.
7. On the issue of costs, in line with the overriding objectives enunciated in Rule 4 of the Elections Petition Rules 2013 with particular emphasis on the words: “..........proportionality and affordable resolution...............” , the respondents shall only be entitled to costs of this application.
8. A Certificate shall issue to I.E.B.C. and the Speaker of the National Assembly under the provisions of Section 86(1) of the Election Act.
Dated, Signed and Delivered at Kitale this 11th day of June, 2013.
A. MSHILA
Delivered in the presence of
Kassachoon, Court clerk
N/A for Petitioner
Samba holding brief for Gumbo for 1st and 2nd respondent
Samba for 3rd respondent
Stephen Karuga, Legal Researcher
Please Wait. Searching ...