[2022] KECA 579 (KLR)

[2022] KECA 579 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had filed a memorandum of appeal, contrary to the basis for the earlier dismissal of its motion for extension of time. Furthermore, the court recognized that Lady Justice J. Mohammed had directed that the applications for extension of time and for striking out of the appeal be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KECA 579 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Commissioner of Domestic Taxes; Respondent: Sturrock Shipping (Kenya) Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal (Application) E328 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Application / Application for Review of Ruling and Orders
Outcome
Application allowed. Orders of 3rd December 2021 rescinded. Applicant's motion to be heard together with respondent's application before a three-judge bench. Costs in the intended appeal.
Judges
KI Laibuta
Legal Topics
Review of Court Orders, Extension of Time, Dismissal of Application, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Review of Court Orders Extension of Time Dismissal of Application Procedural Fairness

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner of Domestic Taxes

Applicant

Sturrock Shipping (Kenya) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Application / Application for Review of Ruling and Orders

  1. 1 Whether the court should rescind its earlier ruling dismissing the applicant's motion for extension of time due to the existence of a memorandum of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the orders of Lady Justice J. Mohammed required the applications for extension of time and striking out of the appeal to be heard together before a three-judge bench.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had filed a memorandum of appeal, contrary to the basis for the earlier dismissal of its motion for extension of time. Furthermore, the court recognized that Lady Justice J. Mohammed had directed that the applications for extension of time and for striking out of the appeal be heard together before a three-judge bench. In light of these facts, the court held that its earlier orders dismissing the applicant's motion should be rescinded to allow the applications to be heard on their merits in accordance with the prior directions. The court emphasized the need to adhere to procedural fairness and to avoid prejudicing the applicant due to a procedural...

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Orders of 3rd December 2021 rescinded. Applicant's motion to be heard together with respondent's application before a three-judge bench. Costs in the intended appeal.

Orders

  • The orders made on 3rd December 2021 dismissing the applicant’s motion dated 16th June 2021 are hereby rescinded.
  • The applicant’s motion dated 16th June 2021 shall be listed for hearing together with the respondent’s pending application for striking out the appeal before a three-judge bench as directed by Lady Justice J. Mohammed.