Chepwambok & another v Chepkemboi (Environment & Land Case 6 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 3927 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court refused to throw out an unserved report, instead pausing testimony so the other side could get the document and prepare cross-examination.
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 defendant's objection to PW4 referring to and producing the NRB Report (dated 14th June 2018) not served on the defendant is sustainable
Key legal issues
#Whether production of an unserved document (the NRB Report) through PW4 amounted to trial by ambush
The objection partially succeeded: the witness was stood down and the plaintiff ordered to supply the documents so the defendant could cross-examine, rather than the evidence being excluded
The court accepted that the DCIO Report in the plaintiffs' list of documents refers to NRB extracts. The defendant was entitled to those documents under constitutional fair-hearing guarantees. Rather than excluding the NRB Report, the court accommodated both the plaintiff's production of evidence and the defendant's right to test it by cross-examination, standing the witness down.
Legal principles established
#- A party has the right to be supplied with documents a witness intends to produce, grounded in fair hearing rights
- The right to be heard is fundamental and permeates the entire justice system
Court orders
#- 1.PW4 is stood down to 27th day of May 2025 for further hearing
- 2.Learned counsel for the plaintiffs to supply the defendant's counsel with all documents relating to extracts and information indicated in the DCIO Report within today
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 3 and 19 of the Environment and Land Court Act 2015 as read with sections 1A, 1B, 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (Chapter 21, Laws of Kenya)
Relief refused
#Defendant's request that PW4 be confined to the DCIO Report only and that the NRB Report not be produced
Objection only partially succeeded; the defendant was to be supplied the documents and given an opportunity to cross-examine, so the evidence was not excluded outright
Costs
No costs order made
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.
The defendant’s counsel has the unlimited right to the requisite documents discerned in the DCIO Report pursuant to Articles 25 (c), 48 and 50 (1) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010.
it is trite law that the right to be heard is fundamental and permeates the entire justice system
PW4 is stood down to 27th day of May 2025 for further hearing.
Learned counsel for the plaintifis to supply the defendant’s counsel with all documents relating to extracts and information indicated in the DCIO Report within today.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal inconsistency: the Act is described as 'Environment and Land Court Act 2015 (2011)'
Judgment lacks a case number, parties' names and the substantive suit details on the face of the extract
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Chepwambok & another v Chepkemboi (Environment & Land Case 6 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 3927 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/3927/eng@2025-05-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.