[1997] KECA 213 (KLR)

[1997] KECA 213 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that under Rule 39(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, an application for leave to appeal must first be considered and refused by the High Court before the Court of Appeal can entertain such an application. In this case, the High Court did not refuse the application for leave to appeal but...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1997] KECA 213 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Margaret Makhanju John; Respondent: David John Kibwana (Executor)
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 314 of 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Probate and Administration, Appellate Jurisdiction
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Probate and Administration Appellate Jurisdiction

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Margaret Makhanju John

Applicant

David John Kibwana (Executor)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant can seek leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal after the High Court struck out, rather than refused, her application for leave to appeal.
  2. 2 Whether Rule 39(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules requires the High Court to refuse, not strike out, an application for leave before the Court of Appeal can entertain such an application.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that under Rule 39(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, an application for leave to appeal must first be considered and refused by the High Court before the Court of Appeal can entertain such an application. In this case, the High Court did not refuse the application for leave to appeal but struck it out for being defective. Therefore, the applicant could not properly seek leave from the Court of Appeal. The application was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.