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

County Government of Nandi v Morong & another (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit E015 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 8611 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya (Environment and Land Court, as constituted at Kapsabet)
9 December 2025
276 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

#

Kenya's Kapsabet Environment and Land Court allowed a defendant to amend her defence and counterclaim, confirming courts freely permit amendments that reveal the real dispute.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an interlocutory decision on a Notice of motion dated 1st October 2025 by the 1st defendant, filed through Aming'a, Opiyo Masese and Company Advocates, seeking leave to amend her statement of defence in terms of a draft amended defence and counterclaim, with a further prayer that the draft be deemed duly filed upon payment of the requisite fees, and that costs be in the cause. Counsel for the applicant, Ms Otieno, urged the court to allow the application, pointing to the affidavit of service sworn on 14th November 2025. Mr A. Kogo, counsel for the plaintiff/respondent, confirmed service and did not oppose the application. The court, Ongondo J, considered the purpose of amendment of pleadings, namely to facilitate the determination of the real issues in controversy, citing Halsbury's Laws of England 4th Edition (re-issue) Volume 36(1) at paragraph 76 and Lastern Bakery v Castelin (1958) 1 EA 461. Holding the application uncontroverted and merited, the court allowed it in terms of all three prayers: leave to amend was granted, the draft amended defence and counterclaim was deemed duly filed upon payment of fees, and costs were ordered to be in the cause. Judgment dated and delivered at Kapsabet on 9th December 2025.

Questions the Court framed

#

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

  1. 1.Whether the 1st defendant should be granted leave to amend her statement of defence in terms of the draft amended defence and counterclaim
  2. 2.Whether the draft amended defence and counterclaim should be deemed duly filed upon payment of requisite fees

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether leave to amend the defence and counterclaim should be granted

Holding

Yes - the application was unopposed and consistent with the purpose of amendments

Reasoning

The court relied on the settled purpose of amendments, namely facilitating determination of the real issues in controversy, citing Halsbury's Laws of England and Lastern Bakery v Castelin. Service was confirmed by the respondent's counsel, who did not oppose the application, so it was uncontroverted and merited.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The purpose of amendment of pleadings is to facilitate the determination of the real issues in controversy

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Leave granted to the 1st Defendant to amend her statement of defence in terms of the draft amended defence and counterclaim attached to the application
  2. 2.The draft amended defence and counterclaim deemed duly filed upon payment of the requisite fees
  3. 3.Costs of the application to be in the cause

The bench

#

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

majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent power to allow amendment of pleadings (provisions not cited in the judgment)

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.

I take into account the purpose of amendment of pleadings namely to facilitate the determination of real issues in controversy
p. 1Purpose of amendment of pleadings
In the circumstances, the application is un-controverted and merited.
p. 2Unopposed application for amendment
Accordingly, the application dated 1st October 2025, is hereby allowed in terms of prayers 1, 2 and 3 as stated in paragraph 1 (a) (b) and (c) hereinabove.
p. 2Final orders

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The judgment does not state the case title, case number or citation

minor

The judgment does not cite the statutory provision empowering the amendment

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "County Government of Nandi v Morong & another (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit E015 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 8611 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/8611/eng@2025-12-09

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