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

Sheikh Ali Taib v George Ellam Wekesa & another [2005] KEHC 1758 (KLR)

[2005] KEHC 1758 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
1758
Citation
[2005] KEHC 1758 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil SuitPostureNotice of Motion for Review of Court OrderCoramJ. KHAMINWA
Holding

The Court finds that the Notice of Motion was extracted and filed in the court's file. The Court also finds that the Notice of Appeal was filed but no appeal was filed in accordance with Court of Appeal rules and the period for filing such an appeal has expired. The objections raised by both Respondents are dismissed.

Facts

The applicant filed a Notice of Motion seeking to review a Court Order dated 22/4/2005. The Notice of Motion was grounded on new evidence showing that the property in dispute was not yet transferred to the applicant.

Issues

  1. Whether the Notice of Motion for Review of Court Order should be dismissed due to the applicant's failure to file a Memorandum of Appeal in accordance with Court of Appeal rules.
  2. Whether the Notice of Motion should proceed to hearing.

Reasoning

The Court ruled that the Notice of Motion was extracted and filed in the court's file. The Court also found that the Notice of Appeal was filed but no appeal was filed in accordance with Court of Appeal rules and the period for filing such an appeal has expired.

Outcome

The Notice of Motion for Review of Court Order is dismissed.

Orders

  • Application of Notice of Motion to proceed to hearing is dismissed.
  • Mr. Kiambaya is granted leave to file a Replying affidavit to the Notice of Motion.
  • Mr. Kiambiya's application for leave to appeal is granted.
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 0.0 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case