[2009] KECA 193 (KLR)
The Court granted leave to withdraw the application for injunction on the basis that it had been overtaken by events, specifically the dismissal of the related appeal. The withdrawal was allowed under Rule 55(6) of the Court of Appeal Rules, and the Court exercised its discretion to make no order as to costs, given...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2009] KECA 193 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Dimken Kenya Limited; Applicant: Dick Maina Githaiga; Applicant: Sarah Gathoni Maina; Applicant: James Wahome Githaiga; Applicant: Kellychard N. Githaiga; Respondent: Barclays Bank of Kenya; Respondent: Moses Kamatu
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application 120 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Injunction Application / Application for Injunction Pending Intended Appeal; Application Withdrawn Before Hearing
- Outcome
- Application withdrawn with no order as to costs.
- Judges
- AM Githinji
- Legal Topics
- Injunctions, Withdrawal of Application, Appeals 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
Dimken Kenya Limited
Applicant
Dick Maina Githaiga
Applicant
Sarah Gathoni Maina
Applicant
James Wahome Githaiga
Applicant
Kellychard N. Githaiga
Applicant
Barclays Bank of Kenya
Respondent
Moses Kamatu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Injunction Application / Application for Injunction Pending Intended Appeal; Application Withdrawn Before Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for injunction should be withdrawn as it has been overtaken by events.
- 2 Whether costs should be awarded upon withdrawal of the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court granted leave to withdraw the application for injunction on the basis that it had been overtaken by events, specifically the dismissal of the related appeal. The withdrawal was allowed under Rule 55(6) of the Court of Appeal Rules, and the Court exercised its discretion to make no order as to costs, given the non-objection by the respondent and the circumstances of the withdrawal.
Court Disposition
Application withdrawn with no order as to costs.
Orders
- Leave to withdraw the application is granted.
- The application is withdrawn under Rule 55(6) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
Civil Appli 120 of 2002 (UR 65/2002)
1. DIMKEN KENYA LIMITED
2. DICK MAINA GITHAIGA
3. SARAH GATHONI MAINA
4. JAMES WAHOME GITHAIGA
5. KELLYCHARD N. GITHAIGA.................................APPLICANTS
AND
BARCLAYS BANK OF KENYA
MOSES KAMATU................................................. RESPONDENTS
(Application for an injunction pending the lodging and hearing of an intended appeal
from the ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Ringera, J.) dated 12th April,
2002
in
H.C.C.C. NO. 186 OF 2000)
*********************
ORDER OF THE COURT
At the hearing of the notice of motion dated 16th May, 2002, Mr. Mungai, learned counsel for the applicants applied for leave to withdraw the application on the ground that the application has been overtaken by events as the applicants had filed Civil Appeal No. 244 of 2002 which was dismissed by this Court on 8th June, 2007.
Miss. Karanja, learned counsel for the 1st respondent, not objecting, leave to withdraw the application is granted with the result that the application is withdrawn under Rule 55 (6) of the Court of Appeal Rules with no orders as to costs.
Dated at Nairobi this 17th day of June, 2009.
R. S. C. OMOLO
..............................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
E. M. GITHINJI
............................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
D. K. S. AGANYANYA
............................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR