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

Peter Kimani Kairu t/a Kimani Kairu & Company Advocates v Anna Marie Cassiede & another [2019] KECA 481 (KLR)

[2019] KECA 481 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
481
Citation
[2019] KECA 481 (KLR)
Decided
19 July 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from the Judgment/Decree of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Luka Kimaru, J.) dated 4th June, 2008CoramP. O. KIAGE, BALDEV RA, Chesoni, Hancox, WAKI, KIAGE, Kiage, Kimaru, Like Madan, Luka Kimaru, Madan, REGISTRAR, KOOME, Waki
Holding

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Facts

The respondents saw an advert for a property and decided to buy it. They offered Ksh.25 million, and the appellant acted for both the sellers and the respondents. The respondents paid a deposit and the appellant drew up a sale agreement, but the respondents raised issues with the agreement. The appellant amended the agreement and the respondents transferred the balance of the purchase price. The respondents then instructed another lawyer and the appellant forwarded the completion documents.

Issues

  1. Whether the High Court properly considered the pleadings and the law before denying the appellant the opportunity to have his defence considered on its merits and instead entering summary judgment for the respondents.
  2. Whether the appellant should be ordered to pay the respondents the sum of Kshs.119,000 with interest and costs.

Reasoning

The court found that the appellant's arguments were

Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Remedies

  • The appellant should pay the respondents the sum of Kshs.119,000 with interest and costs.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (2)
  • GUPTA (Supra)
  • My emphases
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case