[2018] KEHC 7883 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 7883 (KLR)

The court found that the appellants' advocates had been on record since March 2015, contrary to their assertions, and had been properly served with hearing and mention notices. The appellants failed to provide any affidavit evidence explaining the delay or demonstrating sufficient cause for non-attendance at the hearing. The court held that the appeal had lain dormant for ten years due to the appellants' and their advocates' inaction, and that the reasons advanced for reinstatement were factually incorrect and unsubstantiated. The application was therefore without merit and contrary to the overriding objective of the Civil Procedure Act. The court dismissed the application with costs to...

Citation
[2018] KEHC 7883 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Peter Nyaramba Nyabate; Appellant: Riftvalley Bakery Limited; Respondent: Nancy Wakonyo Gatheru; Respondent: Daniel Saitoti; Respondent: Peter Gachoiru Gichanga
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Naivasha
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
16 March 2018
Case Number
Civil Appeal 58 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
CW Meoli
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Non Attendance, Reinstatement of Appeal, Sufficient Cause, Overriding Objective, Costs Award
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Non Attendance Reinstatement of Appeal Sufficient Cause Overriding Objective Costs Award

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Nyaramba Nyabate

Appellant

Riftvalley Bakery Limited

Appellant

Nancy Wakonyo Gatheru

Respondent

Daniel Saitoti

Respondent

Peter Gachoiru Gichanga

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants demonstrated sufficient cause for non-attendance leading to dismissal of the appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the court should set aside the ex-parte proceedings and reinstate the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the appellants' advocates were properly on record at the material time.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellants' advocates had been on record since March 2015, contrary to their assertions, and had been properly served with hearing and mention notices. The appellants failed to provide any affidavit evidence explaining the delay or demonstrating sufficient cause for non-attendance at the hearing. The court held that the appeal had lain dormant for ten years due to the appellants' and their advocates' inaction, and that the reasons advanced for reinstatement were factually incorrect and unsubstantiated. The application was therefore without merit and contrary to the overriding objective of the Civil Procedure Act. The court dismissed the application with costs to...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application to set aside the ex-parte proceedings of 22nd March, 2017 and all consequential orders is dismissed.
  • The application to reinstate the appeal is dismissed.