[2017] KEHC 3057 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 3057 (KLR)

The court found that the appellants had made plausible and bona fide efforts to obtain the trial court proceedings, as evidenced by correspondences indicating the trial court file could not be traced. The respondent did not directly deny that the proceedings had not been supplied to either party, and the court was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEHC 3057 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: John Kinyua Murage; Appellant: Jamleck Mwangi; Appellant: M. W. Kibigi; Respondent: Joseph Onyango Obura
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 546 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Reinstatement of Appeal After Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Application allowed; appeal reinstated subject to conditions.
Judges
JK Sergon
Legal Topics
Reinstatement of Appeal, Non Compliance With Court Orders, Delay in Filing Record of Appeal
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Reinstatement of Appeal Non Compliance With Court Orders Delay in Filing Record of Appeal

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Kinyua Murage

Appellant

Jamleck Mwangi

Appellant

M. W. Kibigi

Appellant

Joseph Onyango Obura

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Reinstatement of Appeal After Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the appellants have provided sufficient cause for the failure to file the record of appeal within the stipulated period.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal should be reinstated after automatic dismissal for non-compliance with court orders.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellants had made plausible and bona fide efforts to obtain the trial court proceedings, as evidenced by correspondences indicating the trial court file could not be traced. The respondent did not directly deny that the proceedings had not been supplied to either party, and the court was satisfied that the appellants' failure to file the record of appeal within the stipulated period was not deliberate. Exercising its discretion, the court held that sufficient cause had been shown for the delay and allowed the application for reinstatement of the appeal, subject to conditions including the deposit of security and timelines for filing the record of appeal.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; appeal reinstated subject to conditions.

Orders

  • The order automatically dismissing the appeal is set aside and the appeal is reinstated.
  • The appellants are given 30 days from the date of the ruling to prepare, file, and serve the record of appeal.