[2015] KECA 20 (KLR)
The Court found that the appellant's advocate was duly served with the hearing notice and acknowledged service, but failed to appear to prosecute the appeal. The respondent was also absent. In these circumstances, and pursuant to rule 102(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, the Court exercised its discretion to dismiss...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KECA 20 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Benard Otieno Ayieko; Respondent: Krisantus Odero
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Kisii
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 81 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Order on Appeal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- DK Musinga, SG Kairu
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Service of Hearing Notice, Appellate Procedure
- 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
Benard Otieno Ayieko
Appellant
Krisantus Odero
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Order on Appeal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution under rule 102(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that the appellant's advocate was duly served with the hearing notice and acknowledged service, but failed to appear to prosecute the appeal. The respondent was also absent. In these circumstances, and pursuant to rule 102(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, the Court exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. No order as to costs was made.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to rule 102(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT KISII
(CORAM: MUSINGA. GATEMBU & MURGOR JJ.A.)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 81 OF 2014
BETWEEN
BENARD OTIENO AYIEKO..............................................APPELLANT
AND
KRISANTUS ODERO...................................................RESPONDENT
(Appeal from the Ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Homa-Bay
( Maina, J.) dated 14th November, 2013
MISC.APPL. NO.10 OF 2013
************************
ORDER OF THE COURT
The appellant's advocate was duly served with today’s hearing notice on 20th April, 2015. He acknowledged service by stamping and signing on the face of the hearing notice.
He is however not in court to prosecute the appeal dated 5th May, 2014. The respondent is also not in court. We understand that the appellant's counsel was to serve today's hearing notice upon the respondent.
In the circumstances, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to the provisions of rule 102 (1) of this Court's Rules.
We make no order as to costs.
Dated at Kisii this 7th day of May, 2015
D.K. MUSINGA
.................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
S. GATEMBU KAIRU
.................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A.K.MURGOR
.................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original
DEPUTY REGISTRAR