[1999] KECA 41 (KLR)

[1999] KECA 41 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that the appeal was incompetent because the order appealed against required leave of the High Court, which had not been obtained. The court found that the absence of leave was a fatal procedural defect that could not be cured by the mere presence of senior counsel or by adjournment....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1999] KECA 41 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: John Kananda & Others; Respondent: Harambee Co-op Society Ltd
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 259 of 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order
Outcome
Appeal struck out as incompetent.
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Competency of Appeal
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Competency of 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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Kananda & Others

Appellant

Harambee Co-op Society Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order

  1. 1 Whether the appeal was competent in the absence of leave from the High Court as required.
  2. 2 Whether the presence of senior counsel could cure the procedural defect.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the appeal was incompetent because the order appealed against required leave of the High Court, which had not been obtained. The court found that the absence of leave was a fatal procedural defect that could not be cured by the mere presence of senior counsel or by adjournment. Consequently, the appeal was struck out for want of jurisdiction, with no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal struck out as incompetent.

Orders

  • The appeal is hereby struck out.
  • No order as to costs.