[1997] KECA 374 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal found that the superior court correctly determined the appellant was a trespasser and that there was no error in principle or otherwise in the order requiring him to vacate the premises. The appellate court saw no reason to interfere with the lower court's decision, as the facts clearly...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1997] KECA 374 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Dr. Charles Irungu; Respondent: Official Receiver Rural Urban Credit Finance
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 110 of 1994
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- RO Kwach, AM Akiwumi
- Legal Topics
- Trespass to Land, Eviction Orders
- 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
Dr. Charles Irungu
Appellant
Official Receiver Rural Urban Credit Finance
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant was a trespasser on the suit premises.
- 2 Whether the superior court erred in ordering the appellant to vacate the premises.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal found that the superior court correctly determined the appellant was a trespasser and that there was no error in principle or otherwise in the order requiring him to vacate the premises. The appellate court saw no reason to interfere with the lower court's decision, as the facts clearly established trespass and justified the order for eviction. The appeal was therefore dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
(CORAM: KWACH, AKIWUMI & LAKHA, JJ.A.)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 110 OF 1994
BETWEEN
DR. CHARLES IRUNGU........................................................APPELLANTANDOFFICIAL RECEIVER RURAL URBAN CREDIT FINANCE....RESPONDENTJUDGMENT OF THE COURT
This is an appeal from the Ruling of the superior court (Shah, J. as he then was) whereby he ordered the appellant to vacate the suit premises finding, as he did, that the appellant was a trespasser. We have heard nothing in support of the appeal to satisfy us that the learned judge erred in principle or otherwise. This is a clear case of trespass and there is nothing before us that calls for an interference.
We are satisfied that there is no merit in this appeal. It is dismissed with costs.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 11th day of December, 1997.
R.O. KWACH............................JUDGE OF APPEAL
A.M. AKIWUMI............................JUDGE OF APPEAL
A.A. LAKHA.............................JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR