[2006] KECA 320 (KLR)
The Court found that the appellant had repeatedly failed to attend the hearing of the appeal, and there were no sufficient grounds to justify any further adjournment. In accordance with Rule 99(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, the Court exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for non-attendance. The Court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2006] KECA 320 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Rosemary Mwinga; Respondent: Godfrey Mahinda; Respondent: Mugure Mahinda
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 119 of 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal Hearing—dismissal for Non Attendance
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed for non-attendance under Rule 99(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Dismissal, Non Attendance, Restoration of Appeal
- 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
Rosemary Mwinga
Appellant
Godfrey Mahinda
Respondent
Mugure Mahinda
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Hearing—dismissal for Non Attendance
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-attendance by the appellant.
- 2 Whether there are sufficient grounds to adjourn the appeal further.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that the appellant had repeatedly failed to attend the hearing of the appeal, and there were no sufficient grounds to justify any further adjournment. In accordance with Rule 99(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, the Court exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for non-attendance. The Court noted that the appellant retains the right to apply for restoration of the appeal under Rule 99(3) if she so wishes. The dismissal was made without an order as to costs.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed for non-attendance under Rule 99(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed under Rule 99(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAKURU
Civil Appeal 119 of 1999
BETWEEN
ROSEMARY MWINGA…………………………………….…………..APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. GODFREY MAHINDA
2. MUGURE MAHINDA…………………………………………..RESPONDENTS
(Appeal from the Judgment & decree of the High Court of Kenya at Nakuru (Rimita J) dated 22nd January, 1996
in
H.C.C.C. NO. 237 OF 1994
***************
ORDER OF THE COURT
The appellant who appears in person has not attended the hearing of the appeal. Mr Mindo, learned counsel for the respondent has attended and applies that the appeal be dismissed under Rule 99 of the Court of Appeal Rules. This appeal has been pending in Court since 30/4/1999. The appeal has been adjourned several times due to failure of the appellant to attend the hearing. There are no good grounds for adjourning this appeal any further. The appellant has a remedy to apply for the restoration of the appeal, if dismissed, under Rule 99(3) if she so wishes.
In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed under Rule 99(1)of the Court of Appeal Rules with no orders as to costs.
Dated and delivered at Nakuru this 2nd day of March, 2006.
R.S.C. OMOLO
………………………
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