[2002] KECA 103 (KLR)

[2002] KECA 103 (KLR)

The Court exercised its discretion to allow the amendment of the record of appeal to include the required certificate under rule 85(5) of the Court of Appeal Rules, noting that all respondents did not oppose the application on condition that their costs were paid. The Court found no reason to deny the application...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] KECA 103 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kamlesh Mansukhlal Damji Pattni; Respondent: Central Bank of Kenya; Respondent: Deposit Fund Protection Board; Respondent: Joseph Kittony; Respondent: George Oraro; Respondent: Messrs Oraro and Company; Respondent: Uhuru Highway Development Ltd; Respondent: Pansal Investments Ltd; Respondent: Grand Hotels Management Ltd
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 194 of 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Leave to Amend Record of Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed with costs to the respondents.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Record, Court of Appeal Rules, Leave to Amend, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Amendment of Record Court of Appeal Rules Leave to Amend Costs Award

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

Kamlesh Mansukhlal Damji Pattni

Applicant

Central Bank of Kenya

Respondent

Deposit Fund Protection Board

Respondent

Joseph Kittony

Respondent

George Oraro

Respondent

Messrs Oraro and Company

Respondent

Uhuru Highway Development Ltd

Respondent

Pansal Investments Ltd

Respondent

Grand Hotels Management Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Leave to Amend Record of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to amend the record of appeal to include a certificate under rule 85(5) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents are entitled to costs of the motion.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court exercised its discretion to allow the amendment of the record of appeal to include the required certificate under rule 85(5) of the Court of Appeal Rules, noting that all respondents did not oppose the application on condition that their costs were paid. The Court found no reason to deny the application and granted the motion as prayed, directing the applicant to bear the respondents' costs and to file and serve a supplementary record by 4 p.m. the same day.

Court Disposition

Application allowed with costs to the respondents.

Orders

  • The motion for leave to amend the record of appeal is granted as prayed.
  • The applicant shall bear the respondents' costs of the motion.