[2001] KEHC 687 (KLR)

[2001] KEHC 687 (KLR)

The court found that the appellants' advocate failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Order III Rule A of the Civil Procedure Rules in filing the application dated 11/12/2000. As a result, the application was defective. Consequently, the court granted the respondent's prayer for the release of the amount...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] KEHC 687 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Kimble Securical Limited; Appellant: James Kimbo; Respondent: Martin Omondi Opondo
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 480 of ??
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application granted in favour of the respondent; amount deposited in court to be released to the respondent; costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Non Compliance With Procedural Rules, Release of Deposit, Interlocutory Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Non Compliance With Procedural Rules Release of Deposit Interlocutory Orders

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

Kimble Securical Limited

Appellant

James Kimbo

Appellant

Martin Omondi Opondo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants complied with Order III Rule A in filing the application.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is entitled to the release of the amount deposited in court pursuant to the ex-parte order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellants' advocate failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Order III Rule A of the Civil Procedure Rules in filing the application dated 11/12/2000. As a result, the application was defective. Consequently, the court granted the respondent's prayer for the release of the amount deposited in court pursuant to the ex-parte order of 7/12/2000, as the procedural lapse by the appellants invalidated their position regarding the retention of the deposit.

Court Disposition

Application granted in favour of the respondent; amount deposited in court to be released to the respondent; costs awarded.

Orders

  • Prayer I of the application is granted.
  • The amount deposited in court pursuant to the ex-parte order of 7/12/2000 is to be released to the plaintiff/respondent.