[2011] KECA 130 (KLR)

[2011] KECA 130 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal found that the evidence sought to be adduced by the applicants—specifically, evidence relating to the death of certain respondents and the lack of substitution—was not available at the time of the hearing of the suit and could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence. The court held that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KECA 130 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Kuwinda Rurinja Co. Ltd; Respondent: Kuwinda Holdings Ltd; Respondent: Colin Davies; Respondent: Joint Liquidators of Ndumberi Farmers Co. Ltd (In Liquidation); Respondent: Simon Kimani; Respondent: Nyawira Kariuki; Respondent: Samuel Muchoki; Respondent: Culumbanis Mlure Ngugi; Respondent: David Kuguru; Respondent: Wairimu Kariuki; Respondent: Mwaura Wamuti Muthee; Respondent: Mbugu Ngigi; Respondent: Francis Ndungu; Respondent: Njeri Mbugua; Respondent: G.R. Muthuri
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal (Application) 8 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Adduce Additional Evidence on Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed. Applicants permitted to adduce additional evidence.
Legal Topics
Additional Evidence on Appeal, Appeal Procedure, Abatement of Appeal, Land Ownership Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Additional Evidence on Appeal Appeal Procedure Abatement of Appeal Land Ownership Disputes

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kuwinda Rurinja Co. Ltd

Appellant

Kuwinda Holdings Ltd

Respondent

Colin Davies

Respondent

Joint Liquidators of Ndumberi Farmers Co. Ltd (In Liquidation)

Respondent

Simon Kimani

Respondent

Nyawira Kariuki

Respondent

Samuel Muchoki

Respondent

Culumbanis Mlure Ngugi

Respondent

David Kuguru

Respondent

Wairimu Kariuki

Respondent

Mwaura Wamuti Muthee

Respondent

Mbugu Ngigi

Respondent

Francis Ndungu

Respondent

Njeri Mbugua

Respondent

G.R. Muthuri

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Adduce Additional Evidence on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be permitted to adduce additional evidence on appeal under rule 29 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence sought meets the threshold for admission as additional evidence on appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the death of certain respondents and lack of substitution affects the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that the evidence sought to be adduced by the applicants—specifically, evidence relating to the death of certain respondents and the lack of substitution—was not available at the time of the hearing of the suit and could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence. The court held that the evidence is weighty, credible, and would have an important influence on the outcome of the appeal, particularly as it may affect the abatement of the appeal against deceased respondents. The court exercised its discretion under rule 29(1)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules and, guided by the overriding objective, allowed the application for additional evidence to be adduced...

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Applicants permitted to adduce additional evidence.

Orders

  • Applicants are permitted to adduce additional evidence in this appeal.
  • The additional evidence shall be taken before the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi.