[2005] KECA 26 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal determined that, in the interests of justice, the respondents' application for adjournment should be allowed due to the short notice resulting from late service of the application. The applicant did not strongly oppose the adjournment but requested an interim stay. The court, after considering...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2005] KECA 26 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Hon. Lady Justice Roselyn Naliaka Nambuye; Respondent: The Hon. The Chief Justice of Kenya; Respondent: Hon. Justice (Rtd) Abdul Majid Cockar; Respondent: Hon. Justice John Mwera; Respondent: Hon. Justice Leonard Njagi; Respondent: Hon. Justice Daniel Musinga; Respondent: Hon. Justice Isaack Lenaola
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application 248 of 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Application for Adjournment and Interim Stay Pending Intended Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for adjournment allowed; matter adjourned for mention; costs in the application.
- Judges
- AM Githinji
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Proceedings, Adjournment, Tribunal Investigation, Judicial Conduct
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Hon. Lady Justice Roselyn Naliaka Nambuye
Applicant
The Hon. The Chief Justice of Kenya
Respondent
Hon. Justice (Rtd) Abdul Majid Cockar
Respondent
Hon. Justice John Mwera
Respondent
Hon. Justice Leonard Njagi
Respondent
Hon. Justice Daniel Musinga
Respondent
Hon. Justice Isaack Lenaola
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Adjournment and Interim Stay Pending Intended Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for adjournment by the respondents should be granted in light of late service of the application.
- 2 Whether an interim stay should be granted pending the hearing of the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal determined that, in the interests of justice, the respondents' application for adjournment should be allowed due to the short notice resulting from late service of the application. The applicant did not strongly oppose the adjournment but requested an interim stay. The court, after considering the submissions, found it appropriate to adjourn the matter for mention on a specified date and ordered that the matter be heard before a bench excluding Githinji, J.A., who disqualified himself. Costs were ordered to be in the application.
Court Disposition
Application for adjournment allowed; matter adjourned for mention; costs in the application.
Orders
- The application is adjourned for mention in Nairobi on 6th October, 2005 at 9:30 a.m.
- The matter shall be heard before a bench excluding Githinji, J.A.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
38 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT ELDORET
CORAM: TUNOI, O’KUBASU & GITHINJI, JJ.A
CIVIL APPLICATION NAI 248 OF 2005
IN THE MATTER OF AN INTENDED APPEAL
BETWEEN
HON. LADY JUSTICE ROSELYN NALIAKA NAMBUYE ………..APPLICANT
AND
THE HON. THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF KENYA……..………1ST RESPONDENT
HON. JUSTICE (RTD) ABDUL MAJID COCKAR…..…….2ND RESPONDENT
HON. JUSTICE JOHN MWERA……..…………….…..…...3RD RESPONDENT
HON. JUSTICE LEONARD NJAGI…..…………….…..…..4TH RESPONDENT
HON. JUSTICE DANIEL MUSINGA..……….………..…….5TH RESPONDENT
HON. JUSTICE ISAACK LENAOLA…………....…….……6TH RESPONDENT
(The 2nd to 6th respondents in their capacity as the Tribunal to Investigate the Conduct of Judges)
(An application for stay of further proceedings and or stay of execution pending the hearing and determination of an intendedappeal to be lodged in the Court of Appeal from the decision of theHigh Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Nyamu, J) dated 22nd April, 2005
in
H.C.MISC.A. NO. 764 OF 2004)
********************
RULING OF THE COURT
This application by way of notice of motion dated 22nd August, 2005 was coming up for hearing this morning. While Mr. Mwenesi with Mr. Simani for the applicant were ready to proceed with the application, Mr. Ombwayo appearing for the respondents applied for adjournment on the ground that he has not had sufficient time in which to contact his clients. He pointed out that the application was served on him on 16th September, 2005.
While Mr. Mwenesi had no strong objection to the application for adjournment he asked us to grant an interim stay.
We have carefully considered counsel’s brief submissions and we are of the view that it would be in interest of justice to allow the application for adjournment.
As Githinji, J.A.disqualifies himself from hearing this matter, we order that this matter be heard before a bench excluding Githinji, J.A.
In view of the foregoing this application is adjourned for mention in Nairobi on 6th October, 2005 at 9. 30 a.m. Costs shall be in the application.
MADE at ELDORET this 22nd day of September, 2005.
P.K. TUNOI
………………………..
JUDGE OF APPEAL
E.O. O’KUBASU
………………………..
JUDGE OF APPEAL
E.M. GITHINJI
…………………………….
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a
true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR