[2023] KEHC 25465 (KLR)
The court found that the appellants' appeal was incompetent because the leave granted to them was specifically to appeal against the ruling of the Co-operative Tribunal delivered on 23/7/2020, not the judgment. The grounds of appeal and the record did not clearly specify the decision being appealed, leading to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 25465 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Simon Gitahi Mwangi; Appellant: James Karibu; Respondent: James Kariuki (Claiming on his Own Behalf and on Behalf of 26 others)
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal E682 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent
- Judges
- JN Mulwa
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Procedure, Leave to Appeal, Costs Award
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Simon Gitahi Mwangi
Appellant
James Karibu
Appellant
James Kariuki (Claiming on his Own Behalf and on Behalf of 26 others)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellants properly appealed against the correct decision of the Co-operative Tribunal.
- 2 Whether the appellants were required to pay costs prior to the determination of the appeal.
- 3 Whether the appeal was competent given the leave granted was specific to the ruling and not the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellants' appeal was incompetent because the leave granted to them was specifically to appeal against the ruling of the Co-operative Tribunal delivered on 23/7/2020, not the judgment. The grounds of appeal and the record did not clearly specify the decision being appealed, leading to ambiguity. Additionally, the court clarified that costs awarded as 'costs in cause' were not immediately payable but only upon determination of the appeal, thus the respondent's argument on non-payment of costs was unfounded. As a result, the appeal was dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Mwangi & another v Kariuki (Claiming on his Own Behalf and on Behalf of 26 others) (Civil Appeal E682 of 2021) [2023] KEHC 25465 (KLR) (Civ) (16 November 2023) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 25465 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Civil
Civil Appeal E682 of 2021
JN Mulwa, J
November 16, 2023
Between
Simon Gitahi Mwangi
1st Appellant
James Karibu
2nd Appellant
and
James Kariuki (Claiming on his Own Behalf and on Behalf of 26 others)
Respondent
(An appeal against the Judgment/Ruling/Awards of the Chairperson of the Co-operative Tribunal of Kenya at Nairobi in Tribunal Case No. 242 of 2016 delivered by Hon. B. Kimemia on 23/7/2021 Tribunal Case 242 of 2016 )
Judgment
1. This court set today’s date for the judgment of this appeal. However, when I retired to prepare the judgment herein I noted that the Respondents had not submitted in response to the Appeal and that he stated that the Appellant lacks audience before this court on grounds that :-a.That the Appellants have failed, refused and/or neglected to file submissions within the time they sought and which this Court allowed,b.That they pointed out to the court that the leave the Appellants had obtained in Misc. Civil Application No. E459 of 2020 was to file an appeal against the Ruling delivered on 23/7/2020 at the Co-operative Tribunal declining to review and set aside its Judgment delivered on 19/9/2017. The Appellants apparently have now appealed against the judgment of the Co-operative Tribunal and not the Ruling.c.That on 7/10/2021 while allowing the Appellants to appeal against the Ruling of the Tribunal delivered on 23/7/2020, Lady Justice Jayden Thuranira directed that the Appellants pay costs for the Miscellaneous Application to date none has been paid.
2. On the issue of costs, this court notes that in the Miscellaneous Application No. E459 of 2022, the Judge allowed the application and costs in cause on paragraph 8 of the Ruling stated that: -“With the foregoing, I allow the application. The Appeal to be filed within 14 days from the date hereof. Costs in cause.”Therefore, the allegations by the Respondent that the Appellants ought to have paid costs does not stand at all since the costs were to be paid once the appeal is determined.
3. On the issue of the Appellants appeal being against the Judgment and not the ruling dated 23/7/2020 at the Co-operative Tribunal, it is clear from the Record of Appeal that the Appellant are not clear on what they are appealing from, from the grounds of Appeal ,it is noted that they are appealing from the Judgment/Ruling/Award /Decree before the Co-operative Tribunal which is not the case since their application for leave was to appeal against the Ruling dated 23/7/2020 and not the Judgment of the Tribunal which still stands.
4. For the foregoing, this appeal is dismissed with costs to the Respondents.
Orders accordingly.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED IN NAIROBI THIS 16THDAY OF NOVEMBER 2023. JANET MULWAJUDGE