Kathurima v County Government of Meru & another (Environment and Land Case 79 of 2019) [2026] KEELC 462 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that a defendant's refusal to participate in its own defence cannot justify delaying a land case hearing.
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 absence of the 1st defendant, whose advocates were present on record, was a proper ground for an adjournment of the hearing
Key legal issues
#Whether an adjournment should be granted where the 1st defendant is absent but its advocates are present on record
Adjournment declined; the 1st defendant's absence and disinterest in its defence cannot ground an adjournment
The court distinguished between the advocates on record and the party they represent. The advocates' predicament arises from their client's disinterest, not from any inability of counsel. A litigant cannot be forced to present its defence, but its choice not to do so does not entitle it to a delay of the hearing; the court proceeds with the trial.
Legal principles established
#- A party's refusal or disinterest in presenting its own defence evidence is not a proper basis for an adjournment, and the court will not compel it to adduce evidence.
Court orders
#- 1.The plea for an adjournment is declined; the court will proceed without the 1st defendant's defence evidence if the 1st defendant does not present it
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Not stated in judgment (Environment and Land Court, Environment and Land Court Act)
Relief refused
#Adjournment of the hearing sought by M/s Kiautha Arithi & Co Advocates for the 1st defendant
The 1st defendant's disinterest in prosecuting its own defence is not a proper ground for an adjournment
Costs
No costs order made 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.
If the 1st defendant is disinterested in prosecuting their defence, that is not a proper ground for an adjournment.
For the above reason, the plea for an adjournment is declined.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment extract contains no case title or case number; only the date, station and judge are stated
The document is a short ex tempore ruling declining an adjournment; no substantive claim, pleadings or final disposition of the suit appear in the extract
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kathurima v County Government of Meru & another (Environment and Land Case 79 of 2019) [2026] KEELC 462 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/462/eng@2026-02-02
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.