SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

John Francis Muyodi v Peter Lunani Ongoma & 2 others [2014] KECA 184 (KLR)

[2014] KECA 184 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
184
Citation
[2014] KECA 184 (KLR)
Decided
18 December 2014
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppellant seeks to strike out the notice of appeal and record of appeal on the grounds of untimely filing.CoramD.K. MARAGA, F. AZANGALALA, S. ole KANTAI
Holding

The application is incompetent for having been filed out of time and is hereby struck out with costs to the appellant.

Facts

The appellant filed the notice of appeal and applied for a copy of the proceedings on July 9, 2013, but failed to serve the applicant with a copy of the application for proceedings as required by Rule 82(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The applicant filed the record of appeal on October 2, 2013, and served it on the applicant's advocates on October 3, 2013.

Issues

  1. Whether the record of appeal was filed out of the prescribed period of 60 days.
  2. Whether the application for striking out the notice of appeal and record of appeal is competent and timely.

Reasoning

The Court found that the applicant's advocates received the record of appeal on or before October 6, 2013, which is within the 60-day period from the filing of the notice of appeal. Therefore, the application is incompetent.

Outcome

The application is struck out with costs to the appellant.

Orders

  • The application to strike out the notice of appeal and record of appeal is dismissed.
  • The application is struck out with costs to the appellant.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Court of Appeal Rules
  • Civil Procedure Rules
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.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case