[2013] KECA 265 (KLR)

[2013] KECA 265 (KLR)

The Court found that the record of appeal was filed three days outside the sixty-day period stipulated by Rule 81 of the Court of Appeal Rules, and that the respondents were served with the record of appeal nineteen days after the prescribed seven-day period under Rule 87. No application for extension of time had...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KECA 265 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Alice Wambu Karanja; Applicant: Rahab Muringe Nderi; Respondent: Jacinta Wairimu Njoroge
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal (Application) 226 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application to Strike Out Record of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal struck out with costs to the respondents.
Judges
SG Kairu, AK Murgor
Legal Topics
Appeal Timelines, Record of Appeal, Service of Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Appeal Timelines Record of Appeal 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alice Wambu Karanja

Applicant

Rahab Muringe Nderi

Applicant

Jacinta Wairimu Njoroge

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application to Strike Out Record of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the record of appeal was filed within the time stipulated by the Court of Appeal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the record of appeal was served upon the respondents within the prescribed period.
  3. 3 Whether the certificate of delay was accurate and consistent with the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the record of appeal was filed three days outside the sixty-day period stipulated by Rule 81 of the Court of Appeal Rules, and that the respondents were served with the record of appeal nineteen days after the prescribed seven-day period under Rule 87. No application for extension of time had been made, and the delays were unexplained and undisputed. The Court concluded that the appellant failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements, warranting the striking out of the appeal under Rule 80 with costs to the respondents.

Court Disposition

Appeal struck out with costs to the respondents.

Orders

  • The appeal is struck out under Rule 80 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.