[2001] KECA 301 (KLR)

[2001] KECA 301 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that the omission to date the ruling sought to be appealed against was a breach of Order XX rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules. This procedural defect rendered the appeal incompetent, as the requirement to date rulings is mandatory and goes to the root of the validity of the proceedings....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] KECA 301 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Njeri Kimani; Appellant: Simon Kinyanjui Kimani; Respondent: Joseph Njoroge Murigi; Respondent: John Mukirae Kinungi; Respondent: Pioneer Building Society Ltd. (In Liquidation)
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 252 of 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
appeal struck out as incompetent
Legal Topics
Appeal Incompetence, Order Xx Rule 3, Undated Ruling, Procedural Irregularity
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Appeal Incompetence Order Xx Rule 3 Undated Ruling Procedural Irregularity

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Njeri Kimani

Appellant

Simon Kinyanjui Kimani

Appellant

Joseph Njoroge Murigi

Respondent

John Mukirae Kinungi

Respondent

Pioneer Building Society Ltd. (In Liquidation)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether an appeal can be sustained where the ruling appealed from is not dated as required by law.
  2. 2 Whether failure to date a ruling renders the appeal incompetent.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the omission to date the ruling sought to be appealed against was a breach of Order XX rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules. This procedural defect rendered the appeal incompetent, as the requirement to date rulings is mandatory and goes to the root of the validity of the proceedings. The court therefore struck out the appeal for want of compliance with the procedural rules, emphasizing that strict adherence to procedural requirements is necessary for the proper administration of justice.

Court Disposition

appeal struck out as incompetent

Orders

  • The appeal is struck out.
  • There is no order as to costs.