[2011] KECA 302 (KLR)

[2011] KECA 302 (KLR)

The Court found that the notice of appeal was lodged within the 14-day period prescribed by Rule 75(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, as the judgment was delivered on 3rd October, 2008 and the notice was lodged on 17th October, 2008. Applying Rule 3(a), the day of the judgment is excluded from the computation, making...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KECA 302 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Hebby Ondieki; Respondent: Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 372 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Legal Topics
Notice of Appeal, Time Limitation, Court of Appeal Rules, Service of Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Notice of Appeal Time Limitation Court of Appeal Rules Service of Process

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

Hebby Ondieki

Applicant

Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the notice of appeal was filed within the time prescribed by the Court of Appeal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the notice of appeal was properly served on the applicant.
  3. 3 Whether the application to strike out the notice of appeal constitutes an abuse of court process.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the notice of appeal was lodged within the 14-day period prescribed by Rule 75(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, as the judgment was delivered on 3rd October, 2008 and the notice was lodged on 17th October, 2008. Applying Rule 3(a), the day of the judgment is excluded from the computation, making the notice timely. The Court concluded that the application to strike out the notice of appeal was without merit and amounted to an abuse of the court process. Consequently, the application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The applicant’s application dated 23rd November, 2009 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.