[2024] KEHC 10999 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 10999 (KLR)

The appeal stood automatically dismissed when the appellants failed to file the Record of Appeal within the 60 days stipulated by the court's order of 26th January, 2023. No application for extension of time or reinstatement was made. The court therefore lacked jurisdiction to determine a non-existent appeal....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 10999 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Erastus Kirimania Kioga; Appellant: Edward Mworia Kioga; Respondent: Winnie Kananu Kioga
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 61 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Existence of Appeal and Costs
Outcome
Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution due to non-compliance with court-ordered timelines. Costs awarded to the respondent.
Judges
JM Omido
Legal Topics
Appeal Dismissal, Record of Appeal Timelines, Probate and Administration, Costs Follow Event
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Family and Children Appeal Dismissal Record of Appeal Timelines Probate and Administration Costs Follow Event

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Erastus Kirimania Kioga

Appellant

Edward Mworia Kioga

Appellant

Winnie Kananu Kioga

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Existence of Appeal and Costs

  1. 1 Whether the appeal was properly before the court given the late filing of the Record of Appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the court could render a judgment on an appeal that had lapsed by operation of a prior court order.
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the appeal in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal stood automatically dismissed when the appellants failed to file the Record of Appeal within the 60 days stipulated by the court's order of 26th January, 2023. No application for extension of time or reinstatement was made. The court therefore lacked jurisdiction to determine a non-existent appeal. Consequently, the only issue left was the allocation of costs, which, pursuant to section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, are to be borne by the appellants as the unsuccessful parties.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution due to non-compliance with court-ordered timelines. Costs awarded to the respondent.

Orders

  • There is no appeal before the court capable of determination; the appeal stands dismissed.
  • Costs of the appeal shall be borne by the appellants.