[2009] KECA 9 (KLR)

[2009] KECA 9 (KLR)

The court dismissed the application for extension of time because neither the applicant nor their counsel appeared at the hearing. Pursuant to Rule 55(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, the absence of the applicant or their advocate entitles the court to dismiss the application. The court exercised this discretion and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KECA 9 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Dr. C.O. Okere; Respondent: Esther Nduta Khyukia; Respondent: Esther Muthoni; Respondent: City Council of Nairobi
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 158 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the 1st and 3rd respondents
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Dismissal for Nonattendance
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Process Dismissal for Nonattendance

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. C.O. Okere

Applicant

Esther Nduta Khyukia

Respondent

Esther Muthoni

Respondent

City Council of Nairobi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

  1. 1 Whether the application for extension of time to file and serve the memorandum and record of appeal should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether absence of the applicant or counsel warrants dismissal of the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court dismissed the application for extension of time because neither the applicant nor their counsel appeared at the hearing. Pursuant to Rule 55(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, the absence of the applicant or their advocate entitles the court to dismiss the application. The court exercised this discretion and awarded costs to the 1st and 3rd respondents.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the 1st and 3rd respondents

Orders

  • The application dated 5th June, 2009 is dismissed with costs to the 1st and 3rd respondents.