[2007] KECA 11 (KLR)

[2007] KECA 11 (KLR)

The Court found that the first respondent failed to institute an appeal within the time prescribed by the Court of Appeal Rules, despite reminders and correspondence from the applicant. The respondent's advocates neither filed a replying affidavit nor attended the hearing, and no explanation was provided for the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] KECA 11 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: American Life Insurance Company (K) Limited; Respondent: Priscilla Wanjiku Kamunya; Respondent: Francis Njenga Mbugua
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 151 of 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed; notice of appeal struck out
Judges
AM Githinji, CA Otieno
Legal Topics
Notice of Appeal, Appeal Timelines, Striking Out Proceedings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Notice of Appeal Appeal Timelines Striking Out Proceedings

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

American Life Insurance Company (K) Limited

Applicant

Priscilla Wanjiku Kamunya

Respondent

Francis Njenga Mbugua

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the notice of appeal should be struck out for inordinate and unexplained delay in filing the intended appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is deemed to have withdrawn the notice of appeal under the Court of Appeal Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the first respondent failed to institute an appeal within the time prescribed by the Court of Appeal Rules, despite reminders and correspondence from the applicant. The respondent's advocates neither filed a replying affidavit nor attended the hearing, and no explanation was provided for the delay. The Court held that, under rule 82(a) of the Rules, the respondent is deemed to have withdrawn the notice of appeal. Consequently, the Court allowed the application and ordered that the notice of appeal be struck out from the Register, with costs to the applicant.

Court Disposition

application allowed; notice of appeal struck out

Orders

  • The notice of appeal dated 4th November, 1998 and lodged on 5th November, 1998 is struck out from the Register.
  • Costs of the application awarded to the applicant.