1. I have considered the application dated 27th October 2023 together with affidavit in support and the replying affidavit filed in opposition to the same. The applicant submitted that the application has been overtaken by events and sought to have the matter “marked as spent with no order as to costs”.
2. I note however that the present application was, in any event, res judicata, the subject matter having been determined by my brother Majanja, J and a ruling in relation to the same issued on 13th October 2023.
3. Further, an appeal in relation to the same subject matter has already been preferred and is under consideration in the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal is therefore presently seized of the matter.
4. Based on the reasons above, I find that the application may be marked as spent but that costs ought to be awarded to the respondent.
5. I decline to issue directions in relation to the hearing of the main suit at this point, and until such time as the Court of Appeal has determined the said appeal presently before it given that its ruling may either breathe life back into the suit or dispose of the same entirely. The parties are at liberty to take a date at the Registry once the appeal has been concluded if need be.