[2016] KEHC 7117 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 7117 (KLR)

The court found that the appellant failed to file written submissions as directed under Order 42 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, and did not attend court despite being duly served with mention and judgment date notices. No reasons or grounds were provided for the appellant's non-compliance or absence. In...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEHC 7117 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Pyrethrum Board of Kenya; Respondent: Buda Cake and Feeds Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 61 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
JK Mulwa
Legal Topics
Appeal Dismissal, Failure to Prosecute, Written Submissions, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Appeal Dismissal Failure to Prosecute Written Submissions Costs Award

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

Pyrethrum Board of Kenya

Appellant

Buda Cake and Feeds Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for failure by the appellant to file written submissions as directed by the court.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was properly served with mention and judgment date notices.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent is entitled to costs of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant failed to file written submissions as directed under Order 42 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, and did not attend court despite being duly served with mention and judgment date notices. No reasons or grounds were provided for the appellant's non-compliance or absence. In these circumstances, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and awarded costs to the respondent. The decision underscores the importance of compliance with procedural directions and the consequences of neglecting to prosecute an appeal.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.