[2024] KECA 366 (KLR)

[2024] KECA 366 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that the applicants' notice of motion seeking certification and leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was filed forty-eight days after the delivery of the impugned judgment, contrary to the fourteen-day period prescribed by Rule 42(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. No extension of time was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KECA 366 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Alice Nduta Mburu; Applicant: Alice Nduta Kimani; Applicant: Andrew Kibe; Applicant: Juliet Njeri; Applicant: Florence Wanjiku Kinyanjui; Applicant: Ancalo Limited; Respondent: Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application Sup 22 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Certification and Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court
Outcome
application struck out as incompetent
Judges
DK Musinga, SG Kairu, M Ngugi
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Certification of Point of Law, Mareva Injunction, Out of Time Application
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Certification of Point of Law Mareva Injunction Out of Time Application

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

Alice Nduta Mburu

Applicant

Alice Nduta Kimani

Applicant

Andrew Kibe

Applicant

Juliet Njeri

Applicant

Florence Wanjiku Kinyanjui

Applicant

Ancalo Limited

Applicant

Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Certification and Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court

  1. 1 Whether the application for certification and leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was filed within the stipulated period under the Court of Appeal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the intended appeal raises a point of law of general public importance warranting certification.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the applicants' notice of motion seeking certification and leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was filed forty-eight days after the delivery of the impugned judgment, contrary to the fourteen-day period prescribed by Rule 42(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. No extension of time was sought or granted prior to the filing of the application. As a result, the application was found to be incompetent. The court determined that, having made this finding, it was unnecessary to consider whether the intended appeal raised a point of law of general public importance. The application was accordingly struck out with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application struck out as incompetent

Orders

  • The notice of motion dated 18th November 2019 is struck out with costs to the respondent.