Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment excerpt· [2025] KEELC 5170 (KLR)

God's House of Miracles (Through National Officials Bishop Joshua Mulinge, Pastor Morrison Kareithi Mwangi) v Mwangi & 4 others; Kenya Commercial Bank Limited (KCB Limited) (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Case 127 of 2019) [2025] KEELC 5170 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
10 July 2025
OAO. A. Angote
4,702 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~19 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Plaintiffs, who allege that the Defendants induced them into sale agreements over LR No. 209/20567 and fraudulently retained 50% of the proceeds, sought leave to adduce additional evidence: a 4th Supplementary List of documents containing an Agreement and Minutes of a meeting of 5th August 2016, and a witness statement of Simon Chege Kamangu. The Plaintiffs explained that Advocate Stella Muendo's evidence had been disallowed as privileged and that Kamangu had earlier been unavailable, expecting amicable settlement. The 1st Defendant opposed, arguing the application was a trial by ambush, an abuse of process six years after filing, that the documents lacked identified authorship, and that Order 11 Rule 7 as amended could not ground the application. The 2nd, 4th and 5th Defendants contended the application sought to circumvent the court's order of 30th July 2024 excluding the advocate's testimony, cited inordinate delay, and questioned the agreement's execution under Section 3(3) of the Law of Contract Act. Justice Angote framed two issues and, guided by the Supreme Court's extension-of-time principles in Salat and additional-evidence principles in Odinga, held the five-year delay unexplained but found the proposed testimony would not alter the cause of action or restart the suit, the Plaintiffs' case was not closed, and prejudice was mitigated by cross-examination and costs. The handwritten documents were held relevant, with admissibility deferred to trial. The application was allowed with costs in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether leave should be granted to call an additional witness (Simon Chege Kamangu) and file his witness statement at a late stage

Holding

Leave granted. Although the five-year delay in listing the witness was unexplained and wanting, the testimony does not alter the cause of action, the Plaintiffs' case is not yet closed, and the Defendants can cross-examine and respond; residual prejudice is compensable by costs.

Reasoning

The court applied extension-of-time principles from Salat and the additional-evidence principles from Odinga. It found the Plaintiffs knew of the witness from the outset and the delay from August 2019 to July 2024 was significant and poorly explained. However, the proposed statement does not alter the cause of action, the Plaintiffs had not closed their case, and the Defendants would have the opportunity to cross-examine and file responsive documents, with costs available to mitigate any prejudice.

p. 8
02

Whether the handwritten agreement and minutes dated 5th August 2016 should be admitted despite challenges to authorship and admissibility

Holding

The documents are relevant to the dispute; questions of authenticity and admissibility are deferred to trial.

Reasoning

The court held that relevance is the threshold requirement, and the documents relate to events surrounding the execution of the 5th August 2016 agreement. Allegations that Simon Chege Kamangu signed the document can only be tested at trial, so admissibility under Section 35 of the Evidence Act would be argued and decided at trial rather than on this interlocutory application.

p. 9

Legal principles established

#
  • A party seeking to adduce evidence outside the prescribed timelines bears the burden of explaining the delay and satisfying the court that the evidence is material and will not unduly prejudice the other side; the court retains discretion guided by the extension-of-time principles.
  • Relevance must be established before admissibility; admissibility of a document may be determined at trial.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Leave granted to the Plaintiffs to adduce additional evidence by way of the Plaintiffs' 4th Supplementary List of documents dated 22nd November 2024, and the Plaintiff's Witness Statement of Simon Chege Kamangu dated 13th January 2025
  2. 2.The costs of the application to be in the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A, 1B, 3 and 3A
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 11 Rule 7; Order 3 Rule 2; Order 50 Rule 6
  • Constitution of Kenya 2010Article 159(2)(d); Article 159(2)(b)
  • Evidence ActSections 5, 35, 134
  • Law of Contract ActSection 3(3)(a)(ii)
  • Environment and Land Court ActSections 3(1) and (2)

Cases cited (3)

  • Salat vs Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 7 Others
    [2014] KESC 12 (KLR)
  • Kanyarkwat Group Ranch & 4 others vs Joseph & 3 others
    [2022] KEELC 15037 (KLR)
  • Odinga & 7 Others vs Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 3 others
    [2013] KESC 1 (KLR)
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 1B, 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 11 Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "God's House of Miracles (Through National Officials Bishop Joshua Mulinge, Pastor Morrison Kareithi Mwangi) v Mwangi & 4 others; Kenya Commercial Bank Limited (KCB Limited) (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Case 127 of 2019) [2025] KEELC 5170 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5170/eng@2025-07-10

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