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

Mwaniki & another v Milele Ventures Ltd; Two Zero Six Ruiru Developers Ltd (Interested Party) (Civil Appeal (Application) 139 of 2014) [2024] KECA 438 (KLR) (12 April 2024) (Ruling)

[2024] KECA 438 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
438
Citation
[2024] KECA 438 (KLR)
Decided
12 April 2024
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil Appeal (Application)PostureApplication to review and set aside its order (Omondi, Laibuta and Gachoka, JJ.A) dated 2nd November 2022 and reinstate the application dated 28th September 2018 in CA No. 139 of 2014CoramK. M'INOTI, MUMBI NGUGI, K. ACHODE
Holding

The application is dismissed with costs to the 2nd appellant.

Facts

The interested party, Two Zero Six Ruiru Developers Ltd, sought to be joined in the appeal and claimed an interest in the suit property. The application was withdrawn by the interested party's previous advocates without the applicant's presence.

Issues

  1. Whether the interested party's previous advocates acted without instructions when withdrawing the application.
  2. Whether the interested party's previous advocates had implied authority to withdraw the application.

Reasoning

The Court found that the interested party's previous advocates had implied authority to withdraw the application and that the interested party has not demonstrated that its previous advocates acted without instructions.

Outcome

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The notice of motion dated 8th December 2022 is dismissed with costs to the 2nd appellant.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (2)
  • Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd v. Specialised Steel Engineering Co. Ltd.
  • Orbit Chemical Industries Ltd v Attorney General
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