[1996] KECA 183 (KLR)

[1996] KECA 183 (KLR)

The Court found that the application was unsupported by affidavit evidence demonstrating that the respondent had failed to take any essential procedural step in the appeal. The Court held that if the applicant was dissatisfied with previous orders or rulings of the superior court, the proper course was to appeal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1996] KECA 183 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd; Respondent: Fisco (Kenya) Limited; Respondent: Paul Okelo Abaja
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 109 of 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Striking Out Appeal and Related Orders
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Striking Out Appeal, Stay of Proceedings, Receiver Management, Proof of Debt
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Striking Out Appeal Stay of Proceedings Receiver Management Proof of Debt

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd

Appellant

Fisco (Kenya) Limited

Respondent

Paul Okelo Abaja

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Striking Out Appeal and Related Orders

  1. 1 Whether the appeal filed by the respondent should be struck out for failure to take essential procedural steps.
  2. 2 Whether the orders of the superior court should be set aside via the present application.
  3. 3 Whether the failure by the Receiver to file proofs of debt justifies striking out the appeal or granting a stay of proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the application was unsupported by affidavit evidence demonstrating that the respondent had failed to take any essential procedural step in the appeal. The Court held that if the applicant was dissatisfied with previous orders or rulings of the superior court, the proper course was to appeal those decisions directly, not to seek relief through the present application. Furthermore, the Court determined that the failure by the Receiver to file proofs of debt did not constitute sufficient grounds to strike out the appeal or to grant a stay of proceedings. None of the conditions required for granting a stay or striking out the appeal had been satisfied. Consequently, the...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.
  • The three appeals filed in this matter by the respondent shall be listed for hearing at the same time.