Choitram & another v Nazari (Civil Appeal 8 of 1982) [1984] KECA 47 (KLR) (20 January 1984) (Judgment)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- 47
- Citation
- [1984] KECA 47 (KLR)
- Decided
- 20 January 1984
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from the High Court's dismissal of an application for judgment on admission under Civil Procedure Rules Order XII rule 6CoramAs Kneller, Chesoni Ag, Hancox Ag, Kneller, Madan, See Farwell, Simpson, ZR CHESONI
Holding
An order for judgment on admission under the Civil Procedure Rules Order XII rule 6 should only be made if it was plain that there were either clear express or clear implied admissions.
Facts
The appeal was against the dismissal of an application for judgment on admission under the Civil Procedure Rules Order XII rule 6. The case involved the circumstances in which a judgment on admission could be issued.
Issues
- What were the circumstances in which a judgment on admission could be issued?
- What was the nature of implied admissions?
- What were the circumstances in which an appellate court could interfere with the exercise of discretion of a lower court?
Reasoning
The court emphasized the need for clear and obvious admissions, stating that they must leave no room for doubt and be obvious on the face of the pleadings.
Outcome
Affirmed the High Court's dismissal of the appellant's application for judgment on admission.
Authorities cited
Legislation (2)
- Civil Procedure Rules
- Transfer of Property Act
Cases cited (2)
- Technistudyv Kelland (1976) 1 WLR 1042
- Geoffrey Lane LJ in Technistudy v Kelland (supra)
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Loading judgment…