Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherNot stated in judgment

Chumo & 2 others v Lelei (Civil Case 63 of 2021) [2025] KEELC 3876 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya (Environment and Land Court)
7 April 2025
299 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court allowed a party to withdraw a court application without opposition, but left the question of who pays costs open for later.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short procedural ruling by the High Court at Kapsabet (G M A Ongondo, Judge) delivered on 7th April 2025 in an ongoing suit that includes a counter claim. Counsel Ms Luseria, instructed by Mr Songok for the plaintiff, applied to withdraw an application dated 18th February 2025 together with the notice of appointment of advocate of even date. The stated purpose of the withdrawal was to pave the way for the hearing of a later application dated 18th March 2025. The application sought to be withdrawn concerned the substitution of the 4th plaintiff, Philip Chumo, with Irene Chepkemboi Koskei; that substitution had not yet been effected. Ms Jeruto, counsel for the defendant in the suit (who is the plaintiff in the counter claim), raised no objection to the withdrawal subject to costs. Mr Kwame, instructed by Ms Odeyo for the 5th defendant in the counter claim, also had no objection. The court noted its discretion over costs under the proviso to section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, Chapter 21, found the withdrawal application firm and meritorious, and marked the application dated 18th February 2025 as withdrawn with costs in the cause. Walter Kipkorir served as court assistant. The ruling disposes only of the withdrawal; the substitution and the 18th March 2025 application remain outstanding in the suit.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the application dated 18th February 2025, together with the notice of appointment of advocate of even date, should be withdrawn and whether costs should be awarded

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether an unopposed application for withdrawal of a substitution application should be allowed and on what costs terms

Holding

The withdrawal was allowed and costs awarded in the cause, there being no objection from any party.

Reasoning

The applicant sought to withdraw the application dated 18th February 2025 (seeking substitution of the 4th plaintiff Philip Chumo with Irene Chepkemboi Koskei) to pave the way for a later application dated 18th March 2025. Both the defendant in the suit and the 5th defendant in the counter claim raised no objection, subject to costs. The court invoked its discretion on costs under the proviso to section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act and found the withdrawal meritorious, marking the application withdrawn with costs in the cause.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The court has discretion to award costs of an application withdrawn, per the proviso to section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 18th February 2025, together with the notice of appointment of advocate of even date, marked as withdrawn with costs in the cause

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Discretion to award costs under the proviso to section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, Chapter 21, Laws of Kenya

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.

Accordingly, the application dated 18th February 2025 is hereby marked as withdrawn with costs in the cause.
p. 2Final orders - withdrawal with costs in the cause
This court has the discretion to award costs of the application as per the proviso to section 27 (10 of the Civil Procedure Act Chapter 21 Laws of Kenya.
p. 2Costs discretion under section 27 Civil Procedure Act
It is therefore, the finding of this court that the application for withdrawal is firm and meritorious.
p. 2Merits of the withdrawal application

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The judgment refers to 'section 27 (10' of the Civil Procedure Act, apparently a typographical rendering of the proviso to section 27(1).

minor

The case number and full party names are not stated anywhere in the ruling.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Chumo & 2 others v Lelei (Civil Case 63 of 2021) [2025] KEELC 3876 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/3876/eng@2025-04-07

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.