Kosgey & another v Kosgey & 3 others (Environment & Land Case E022 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 477 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court in Kapsabet confirmed that a party can compel a public officer to appear and produce documents once a proper notice has been served.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the application by the plaintiffs to call the 3rd defendant to produce documents specified in the notice to produce documents dated 25th April 2024 is meritorious
Key legal issues
#Whether the plaintiffs could compel the 3rd defendant, a public officer, to appear and produce documents under a notice to produce
The application was allowed; the plaintiffs have the right to call the 3rd defendant pursuant to the duly served notice to produce documents.
The court found it undisputed that the notice to produce documents was served on the 3rd defendant, and that the suit was listed for hearing on consecutive days consistent with the constitutional dictate that justice shall not be delayed. Public documents were listed in the notice served on the 3rd defendant, a public officer. Relying on constitutional guarantees of fair hearing, access to justice and expeditious justice, the court held the plaintiffs entitled to call the 3rd defendant and allowed the application.
Legal principles established
#- A party has a fundamental right to call a witness, including a public officer served with a notice to produce documents, in pursuit of a fair hearing and expeditious disposal of justice.
Court orders
#- 1.The application to call the 3rd defendant to produce documents specified in the notice to produce documents dated 25th April 2024 is allowed
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent and case-management powers under the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21) and Civil Procedure Rules 2010, guided by Articles 50(1), 25(c), 48 and 159(2)(b) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In the premises, the application is merited and the same is hereby allowed accordingly.
In the spirit of Articles 50 (1), 25 (c). 48 and 159 (2) (b) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010, the applicants have the fundamental right to call the 3rd defendant pursuant to the notice to produce documents duly served herein;
Justice shall not be delayed
It is not in dispute that the notice to produce documents was served on the 3rd defendant to give evidence thereof.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment does not state the case number or citation of the suit in which the ruling was delivered.
The judgment does not record the names of the parties; only their roles (plaintiffs and defendants) are given.
The names of the parties and suit number cannot be determined from the ruling, limiting its citability.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kosgey & another v Kosgey & 3 others (Environment & Land Case E022 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 477 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/477/eng@2025-02-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.