[2000] KECA 395 (KLR)

[2000] KECA 395 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that the record of appeal was filed outside the 60-day period permitted by the rules, and no leave of court was sought or obtained for the late filing. The appellant, through counsel, conceded this procedural default. As a result, the appeal was incompetent and could not be entertained by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2000] KECA 395 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Guilders International Bank Ltd; Respondent: Chimanlal Hilji Shah & 19 Others; Respondent: Carnation Apartments Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 112 of 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection Regarding Competence of Appeal
Outcome
appeal struck out as incompetent
Legal Topics
Appeal Timelines, Record of Appeal Filing, Leave of Court, Striking Out Incompetent Appeal
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Appeal Timelines Record of Appeal Filing Leave of Court Striking Out Incompetent Appeal

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

Guilders International Bank Ltd

Appellant

Chimanlal Hilji Shah & 19 Others

Respondent

Carnation Apartments Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection Regarding Competence of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the appeal was filed within the prescribed time limit under the rules of court.
  2. 2 Whether leave of court was required and obtained for late filing of the record of appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the appeal is competent in the absence of compliance with procedural requirements.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the record of appeal was filed outside the 60-day period permitted by the rules, and no leave of court was sought or obtained for the late filing. The appellant, through counsel, conceded this procedural default. As a result, the appeal was incompetent and could not be entertained by the court. The court therefore ordered that the appeal be struck out with costs to the respondents, both for the application and the appeal itself.

Court Disposition

appeal struck out as incompetent

Orders

  • The appeal is struck out with costs to the respondents for both the application dated 17th September, 1999 and the appeal.