[2021] KECA 355 (KLR)

[2021] KECA 355 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants had not placed on record the original record of appeal or the intended supplementary record, making it impossible to ascertain compliance with Rule 87(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules. Additionally, there was no evidence that the application had been served on the respondents as...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KECA 355 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Grace Wairimu Machua; Appellant: Rosemary Wamaitha Kamau; Respondent: Jacinta Nduta
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 45 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application referred to Deputy Registrar for determination.
Judges
KI Laibuta
Legal Topics
Supplementary Record of Appeal, Leave to File Out of Time, Service of Process, Court of Appeal Rules
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Supplementary Record of Appeal Leave to File Out of Time Service of Process Court of Appeal Rules

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

Grace Wairimu Machua

Appellant

Rosemary Wamaitha Kamau

Appellant

Jacinta Nduta

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have complied with the procedural requirements for filing a supplementary record of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the application for leave to file a supplementary record of appeal was properly served on the respondents.
  3. 3 Whether the application ought to be determined by the Deputy Registrar under Rule 88 of the Court of Appeal Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had not placed on record the original record of appeal or the intended supplementary record, making it impossible to ascertain compliance with Rule 87(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules. Additionally, there was no evidence that the application had been served on the respondents as required by Rule 92(3). The court further held that, in any event, an application under Rule 88 for leave to file a supplementary record of appeal should be made to the Deputy Registrar, not to the judge. Consequently, the application was not properly before the court and was directed to be listed before the Deputy Registrar for determination.

Court Disposition

Application referred to Deputy Registrar for determination.

Orders

  • The Applicants’ Notice of Motion dated 1st April 2021 be listed before the Deputy Registrar for determination.