[2017] KEHC 9595 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent had taken necessary steps to prosecute the appeal, including filing the Record of Appeal and ensuring the lower court file was before the court. The appeal had only recently been admitted, and the application for dismissal was filed less than a month after admission. Therefore,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 9595 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: A.O.BASID LIMITED; Respondent: TAKAFUL INSURANCE OF AFRICA
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 214 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- BT Jaden
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Appeal Admission, Interim Injunctions
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
A.O.BASID LIMITED
Applicant
TAKAFUL INSURANCE OF AFRICA
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
- 2 Whether the respondent has taken adequate steps to prosecute the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent had taken necessary steps to prosecute the appeal, including filing the Record of Appeal and ensuring the lower court file was before the court. The appeal had only recently been admitted, and the application for dismissal was filed less than a month after admission. Therefore, the appeal was not suitable for dismissal for want of prosecution. The application was dismissed with costs in the cause.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 5th December, 2016 is dismissed with costs in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL DIVISION
HIGH COURT CIVIL APPEAL NO. 214 OF 2015
A.O.BASID LIMITED..................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
TAKAFUL INSURANCE OF AFRICA....................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The application dated 5th December, 2016 seeks orders that the appeal herein be dismissed for want of prosecution.
2. The application is premised on the grounds stated in the body of the application and is supported by the affidavit sworn on 5th December, 2016 by Paddy Cheloti, counsel for the Applicant. It is stated that the Respondent has been enjoying interim orders of injunction given by this court on 18th June, 2015 but has not taken any steps to have the appeal listed for directions under Section 79B Civil Procedure Act Cap 21 Laws of Kenya. It is further stated that the Respondent has lost interest in the appeal but is determined to delay the Respondent from enjoying the fruits of the judgment.
3. The application is opposed. It is stated in the replying affidavit that the Applicant is keen on prosecuting the appeal and has compiled and filed the Record of Appeal. That the lower court file has also been forwarded to this court and it is in the interest of justice that the Appeal be heard and determined.
4. During the hearing of the Appeal the parties opted to file written submissions. The Respondent’s side filed theirs but the Applicant did not file any. I have considered the submissions filed.
5. The lower court file was received in this court’s registry on 27th September, 2016. The Record of Appeal was filed on 4th April, 2016. The Appeal was admitted on 7th November 2016. The application at hand was filed on 5th December, 2016 a period of slightly less than a month from the date the Appeal was admitted. The Appeal is therefore not suitable for dismissal. Consequently, the application is dismissed with costs in cause.
Dated, signed and delivered at Nairobi this 8th day of Nov., 2017
B. THURANIRA JADEN
JUDGE