[1997] KECA 171 (KLR)

[1997] KECA 171 (KLR)

The Court held that the applicant had not sought and obtained substitution in place of his deceased father, who had originally lodged the Notice of Appeal. Without such substitution, the applicant lacked the legal capacity to make the present application for extension of time to appeal. Consequently, the application...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1997] KECA 171 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Evan Ngugi Kinyanjui; Respondent: Phillis Mbute; Respondent: Mararo Kamau; Respondent: James Mbugua Mbute; Respondent: Muiruri Kamau; Respondent: Charles Muita Kamau; Respondent: Esther Nyambura Kamau
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 127 of 1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
Application struck out as incompetent with costs to the respondents.
Judges
JE Gicheru
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Substitution of Parties, Capacity to Sue
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Substitution of Parties Capacity to Sue

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evan Ngugi Kinyanjui

Applicant

Phillis Mbute

Respondent

Mararo Kamau

Respondent

James Mbugua Mbute

Respondent

Muiruri Kamau

Respondent

Charles Muita Kamau

Respondent

Esther Nyambura Kamau

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant had legal capacity to seek extension of time to appeal in place of his deceased father.
  2. 2 Whether substitution of the applicant in place of the deceased defendant was a prerequisite for the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the applicant had not sought and obtained substitution in place of his deceased father, who had originally lodged the Notice of Appeal. Without such substitution, the applicant lacked the legal capacity to make the present application for extension of time to appeal. Consequently, the application was incompetent and was struck out with costs to the respondents.

Court Disposition

Application struck out as incompetent with costs to the respondents.

Orders

  • The application is struck out as incompetent.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.