[2021] KEHC 8444 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 8444 (KLR)

The High Court dismissed the application for revision on the basis that the applicants failed to demonstrate any incorrectness, illegality, or impropriety in the lower court's orders requiring them to appear virtually for plea and be served with summons by electronic mail. The court found that the inclusion of the Director of Public Prosecution and Directorate of Criminal Investigations as respondents in these private prosecution proceedings was irregular, and struck them out. The court held that extradition proceedings were not a prerequisite for the applicants' appearance, especially since they had previously participated in the proceedings and could appear virtually. The court further...

Citation
[2021] KEHC 8444 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Nokia Corporation; Applicant: Roschier Attorneys Limited; Applicant: Rajeev Suri; Applicant: Aapo Saarikivi; Respondent: Technoservice Limited; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecution; Respondent: Directorate of Criminal Investigations
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
18 March 2021
Case Number
Civil Case E052 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Lower Court Orders Requiring Virtual Plea and Electronic Service of Summons
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
DO Ogembo
Legal Topics
Private Prosecution, Extradition Procedure, Virtual Plea Taking, Jurisdiction of Court, Revisionary Powers, Service of Summons
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Private Prosecution Extradition Procedure Virtual Plea Taking Jurisdiction of Court Revisionary Powers Service of Summons

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nokia Corporation

Applicant

Roschier Attorneys Limited

Applicant

Rajeev Suri

Applicant

Aapo Saarikivi

Applicant

Technoservice Limited

Respondent

Director of Public Prosecution

Respondent

Directorate of Criminal Investigations

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Lower Court Orders Requiring Virtual Plea and Electronic Service of Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court should set aside or reverse the lower court's order requiring the applicants to appear virtually for plea and be served with summons by electronic mail.
  2. 2 Whether the inclusion of the Director of Public Prosecution and Directorate of Criminal Investigations as respondents in private prosecution proceedings is proper.
  3. 3 Whether extradition proceedings are a prerequisite for private prosecution against foreign applicants not within the jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court dismissed the application for revision on the basis that the applicants failed to demonstrate any incorrectness, illegality, or impropriety in the lower court's orders requiring them to appear virtually for plea and be served with summons by electronic mail. The court found that the inclusion of the Director of Public Prosecution and Directorate of Criminal Investigations as respondents in these private prosecution proceedings was irregular, and struck them out. The court held that extradition proceedings were not a prerequisite for the applicants' appearance, especially since they had previously participated in the proceedings and could appear virtually. The court further...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application dated 22.2.2021 is dismissed wholly.
  • The 2nd and 3rd Respondents are struck out from these proceedings as irregular, null and void.