[2023] KEHC 22179 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 22179 (KLR)

The court found that the appeal was filed one year out of time, contrary to the thirty-day period stipulated under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act, and no leave for extension of time had been sought or granted. As a result, there was no valid appeal before the court. Citing established authority, the court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 22179 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Khatibu Mwinyihaji Khatibu; Respondent: Kelias Potua Wandogho
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal E054 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Striking Out of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal struck out; application dismissed; costs to respondent.
Judges
F Wangari
Legal Topics
Appeal Out of Time, Stay of Execution, Striking Out Pleadings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Appeal Out of Time Stay of Execution Striking Out Pleadings

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khatibu Mwinyihaji Khatibu

Appellant

Kelias Potua Wandogho

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Striking Out of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the appeal was filed within the statutory period prescribed by Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act.
  2. 2 Whether the court can grant a stay of execution when the appeal is filed out of time without leave.
  3. 3 Whether proceedings based on a null appeal are themselves null and void.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appeal was filed one year out of time, contrary to the thirty-day period stipulated under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act, and no leave for extension of time had been sought or granted. As a result, there was no valid appeal before the court. Citing established authority, the court held that proceedings founded on a nullity are themselves null and void. Consequently, the application for stay of execution, being premised on a non-existent appeal, was untenable and had to be dismissed. The court struck out the appeal and dismissed the application, awarding costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Appeal struck out; application dismissed; costs to respondent.

Orders

  • The appeal herein was filed out of time without leave and is accordingly struck out.
  • The application dated March 14, 2023 is dismissed.