1. By its ruling herein dated 9th April 2026, this Court struck out the 5th Respondent’s replying affidavit on the ground that it was filed and served out of time in breach of the Court’s directions of 26th June 2025.
2. By his Notice of Motion Application, the 5th Respondent has approached this Court, seeking that this Court be pleased to review, vary and/or set aside the order. The Applicant contends that there is an error apparent on the record.
3. The 5th Respondent argues that the affidavit was filed within the timelines set by the Court in its above-mentioned order. The order did not fix any timelines for the service of the affidavit. As such, the Court would not strike out the affidavit on the ground that it was not served within the timelines set out in its above-mentioned order.
4. The Applicant/Respondent has opposed the application in any of the ways recognised by law. Instead, he has filed very lengthy submissions, which, with great respect, this Court finds not to the point in relation to the application at hand.
5. I have carefully examined the proceedings and the order dated 26th May 2025, and agree with the 5th Respondent that the order did not set time frames for the service of the replying affidavits, but only for their filing.
6. As such, I agree with the 5th Respondent that there is an error apparent on record. This Court, having not set specific time lines for service of the replying affidavit, could not fairly strike it out on the ground that it did.
7. Having said that, as I have hereinabove, I find the 5TH Respondent’s application meritorious. It is hereby allowed. Consequently, the order striking out the 5th Respondent’s replying affidavit is hereby set aside. The affidavit is reinstated to the record. It shall be considered for the Judgment of this Court.
Read Signed and Delivered this 7th Day of May 2026.