[2020] KECA 425 (KLR)

[2020] KECA 425 (KLR)

The court found that the Notice of Appeal, though filed on 24th July, 2019, was served on 2nd August, 2019, which was outside the mandatory seven-day period stipulated by Rule 77(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The court emphasized that the rule is couched in mandatory terms and that failure to comply with the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KECA 425 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Equatorial Land Holdings Limited; Applicant: Karebe Gold Mining Limited; Respondent: Cheseret Arap Korir
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 36 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed. Notice of Appeal struck out with costs to the applicants.
Judges
AK Murgor, A Mohammed, S ole Kantai
Legal Topics
Notice of Appeal Service, Court of Appeal Rules, Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Notice of Appeal Service Court of Appeal Rules Land Disputes

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Equatorial Land Holdings Limited

Applicant

Karebe Gold Mining Limited

Applicant

Cheseret Arap Korir

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the Notice of Appeal was served within the mandatory seven-day period as required by Rule 77(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether failure to serve the Notice of Appeal within the prescribed period renders it fatally defective and liable to be struck out.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Notice of Appeal, though filed on 24th July, 2019, was served on 2nd August, 2019, which was outside the mandatory seven-day period stipulated by Rule 77(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The court emphasized that the rule is couched in mandatory terms and that failure to comply with the service requirement renders the Notice of Appeal invalid. The court rejected the respondent's argument that the delay was due to the Deputy Registrar's oversight, holding that the responsibility for timely service lies with the party serving the notice. The court concluded that there was no valid Notice of Appeal on record and allowed the application to strike it out, awarding...

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Notice of Appeal struck out with costs to the applicants.

Orders

  • The Notice of Appeal dated and filed on 24th July, 2019 is struck out.
  • Costs of the application are awarded to the applicants.