[2017] KEHC 7816 (KLR)
The court found that although the two appeals arise from different orders made in the same Children’s Court case, there is no abuse of process in their parallel existence. However, for prudent expenditure of judicial time and to avoid duplication, the court directed that the two appeals be consolidated and disposed...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 7816 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Richard Onchaga Moses; Respondent: Risper Oeri
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 66 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Consolidation and Directions
- Outcome
- Appeals consolidated and to be disposed of simultaneously.
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Child Maintenance Enforcement, Civil Jail Committal, Appeal Consolidation
- Source Language
- english
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Richard Onchaga Moses
Appellant
Risper Oeri
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Consolidation and Directions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the existence of two parallel appeals constitutes an abuse of court process.
- 2 Whether the appeals arising from the same lower court cause but different orders should be consolidated for efficient disposal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the two appeals arise from different orders made in the same Children’s Court case, there is no abuse of process in their parallel existence. However, for prudent expenditure of judicial time and to avoid duplication, the court directed that the two appeals be consolidated and disposed of simultaneously. The parties were granted liberty to fix the pending applications for hearing, with the matter to be handled by any Judge in the Family Division.
Court Disposition
Appeals consolidated and to be disposed of simultaneously.
Orders
- The two appeals are consolidated and shall be disposed of simultaneously.
- Parties are at liberty to fix the pending applications for hearing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 66 OF 2015
RICHARD ONCHAGA MOSES….……….…APPELLANT
VERSUS
RISPER OERI……………………........…..RESPONDENT
(An appeal arising from the decision to issue warrants of arrest and committal to civil jail by the Children’s Court at Nairobi before the Honourable A. Nyoike (Senior Resident Magistrate) on 9th July 2015 in Children’s Case No. 537 of 2013)
RULING
1. The instant matter was filed herein on 10th July 2015; vide a memorandum of appeal dated 10th July 2015. The appellant filed the memorandum of appeal simultaneously with a Motion of even date seeking interlocutory orders.
2. The appellant had been committed to civil jail by the lower court, and orders were made on 15th July 2015 for his release conditionally. The application was to thereafter be heard on a date to be given at the registry. The said application is yet to be heard, despite several court appearances.
3. It emerged at the appearance on 10th March 2016, that there was a parallel appeal cause, being HCCA No. 57 of 2014. I made an order then directing that the two files be put together. That has been done hence this ruling on the direction that the matters ought to take.
4. According to the court file in HCCA No. 57 of 2014, the matter commenced by way of a memorandum of appeal dated 22nd July 2014 and filed therein on 27th July 2014 by the appellant in HCCA No. 66 of 2015 against the respondent in the said cause. The said appeal challenged orders that had been made in Nairobi Children’s Court Case Number 537 of 2013 on diverse dates in 2014 by A. W. Nyoike, Ag. SRM.
5. There was an interlocutory application dated 9th December 2014. The same was resolved by a consent recorded on 25th July 2014 to the effect that the appellant would be released from civil jail on certain conditions.
6. The two appeals arise from decisions made by the lower court in a suit between the two parties. The orders were made in different dates. The appeals are therefore challenging different orders but made in the same cause by the same magistrate. I do not think it can be, in the circumstances, said that there is abuse of process.
7. The two appeals can very well proceed separately, but to enable prudent expenditure of judicial time, I shall direct that the appeals be consolidated and disposed of simultaneously. The parties are now at liberty to fix the pending applications for hearing. Dates to be obtained at the registry on priority. Matter to be handled by any Judge in the Family Division.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 .
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE