[2017] KEHC 3298 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 3298 (KLR)

The court found that the appellants failed to take any steps to prosecute their appeal for over three years after service of the memorandum of appeal. Directions had been given for the appeal to proceed by way of written submissions, but the appellants did not file any submissions. The court rejected the appellants' explanation regarding lack of notice of transfer, noting that the High Court at Nyeri had notified the advocates at the address on record, and no evidence was provided of a change of address. There was also no evidence of any follow-up by the appellants or their counsel. The court concluded that no proper or acceptable reason was given for the delay, and that the respondent...

Citation
[2017] KEHC 3298 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Charles Maina Chege; Appellant: Joyce Kabui Chege; Appellant: Irene Wairimu Chege; Appellant: John Irungu Chege; Respondent: Jesse Muthiga Albert
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Murang'a
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
22 September 2017
Case Number
Civil Appeal 165 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Judges
DW Mbuteti
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Delay in Prosecution, Appeals Process
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Delay in Prosecution Appeals Process

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Maina Chege

Appellant

Joyce Kabui Chege

Appellant

Irene Wairimu Chege

Appellant

John Irungu Chege

Appellant

Jesse Muthiga Albert

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to inordinate delay by the appellants.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants provided a justifiable reason for failing to prosecute the appeal for over three years.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellants failed to take any steps to prosecute their appeal for over three years after service of the memorandum of appeal. Directions had been given for the appeal to proceed by way of written submissions, but the appellants did not file any submissions. The court rejected the appellants' explanation regarding lack of notice of transfer, noting that the High Court at Nyeri had notified the advocates at the address on record, and no evidence was provided of a change of address. There was also no evidence of any follow-up by the appellants or their counsel. The court concluded that no proper or acceptable reason was given for the delay, and that the respondent...

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed for want of prosecution

Orders

  • The appellants' appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
  • The respondent is awarded costs of the appeal.