City Clock (Kenya) LTD v Paul Muimi Mutemi & another [2019] KEIPT 26 (KLR)
- Court
- KEIPT
- Case number
- 26
- Citation
- [2019] KEIPT 26 (KLR)
- Decided
- 12 September 2019
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeIndustrial Design DisputePostureRespondents applied for adjournment due to personal matters, which was opposed by the applicant.CoramBrown M. Kairaria, Wycliffe Swanya, Pauline Mudeshi, Brettah Muthuri
Holding
The application for adjournment is dismissed, and the respondents' case proceeds for hearing.
Facts
The case involves Industrial Design No. 1327 & 1328. The 1st Respondent was away in his rural home due to a personal emergency, and the 2nd Respondent was not present.
Issues
- Whether the application for adjournment should be granted.
- Whether the costs should be awarded to the applicant.
Reasoning
The hearing date was taken in court by consent, and the respondent's counsel had the conduct of the matter. The reasons given for adjournment were not legitimate, and the respondents' absence was not explained.
Outcome
The application for adjournment is dismissed.
Orders
- The respondents' case proceeds for hearing.
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…