[2021] KECA 784 (KLR)

[2021] KECA 784 (KLR)

The Court found that the notice of appeal was not properly filed as it lacked the Registrar's signature and did not specify whether the appeal was against the whole or part of the judgment, both of which are mandatory requirements under Rule 75 of the Court of Appeal Rules. Additionally, the respondent failed to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KECA 784 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Andrew Muciri Muriuki; Respondent: Nancy Waguama Kareithi
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 8 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed; notice of appeal struck out with costs to the applicant
Judges
FI Koome, AK Murgor
Legal Topics
Appeals Procedure, Succession Causes, Leave to Appeal, Notice of Appeal Requirements
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Family and Children Appeals Procedure Succession Causes Leave to Appeal Notice of Appeal Requirements

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Muciri Muriuki

Applicant

Nancy Waguama Kareithi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the notice of appeal was properly filed with the Registrar of the trial court as required by the rules.
  2. 2 Whether the notice of appeal indicated if the appeal was against the whole or part of the judgment as required.
  3. 3 Whether leave to appeal was required and, if so, whether it was obtained before lodging the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the notice of appeal was not properly filed as it lacked the Registrar's signature and did not specify whether the appeal was against the whole or part of the judgment, both of which are mandatory requirements under Rule 75 of the Court of Appeal Rules. Additionally, the respondent failed to obtain leave to appeal as required in succession matters, in accordance with Rule 39 (b) and established case law. The absence of these essential steps rendered the notice of appeal incompetent. Consequently, the Court allowed the application to strike out the notice of appeal on both grounds.

Court Disposition

application allowed; notice of appeal struck out with costs to the applicant

Orders

  • The notice of appeal dated and filed on 23rd December 2019 is struck out for being incompetent.
  • Costs awarded to the applicant.