[1996] KECA 152 (KLR)

[1996] KECA 152 (KLR)

The Court found that the respondents failed to file an appeal within the prescribed time after lodging the Notice of Appeal, despite the proceedings being ready and available. This omission constituted a failure to take an essential step in the appellate process. The Court held that such inaction justified striking...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1996] KECA 152 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Stephen Kagooiyo; Applicant: Daniel Muchoki; Respondent: Joseph Waithaka Kabai; Respondent: Kahata Muchau; Respondent: Charles Kabochi Njema; Respondent: Guchu Kibara t/a Matuu Bus Service
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 313 of 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed; notice of appeal struck out with costs
Judges
AM Akiwumi
Legal Topics
Notice of Appeal, Striking Out Proceedings, Appeal Timelines
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Notice of Appeal Striking Out Proceedings Appeal Timelines

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

Stephen Kagooiyo

Applicant

Daniel Muchoki

Applicant

Joseph Waithaka Kabai

Respondent

Kahata Muchau

Respondent

Charles Kabochi Njema

Respondent

Guchu Kibara t/a Matuu Bus Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the Notice of Appeal should be struck out for failure to file the appeal within the prescribed time period.
  2. 2 Whether an essential step in the appellate process was omitted by the respondents.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the respondents failed to file an appeal within the prescribed time after lodging the Notice of Appeal, despite the proceedings being ready and available. This omission constituted a failure to take an essential step in the appellate process. The Court held that such inaction justified striking out the Notice of Appeal, as the time for filing the appeal had lapsed and no explanation or further action was provided by the respondents.

Court Disposition

application allowed; notice of appeal struck out with costs

Orders

  • The Notice of Appeal lodged in Court on 16th March, 1995 is struck out.
  • The applicants are awarded costs of the application.