[2024] KEHC 12033 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 12033 (KLR)

The court found that the appeal abated on 21.2.2024, one year after the death of the appellant, as no application for substitution was made within the prescribed period and no leave was sought to extend the limitation period prior to the current application. The court emphasized that it is not its duty to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 12033 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Monica Aduda Sule; Respondent: Duncan Otieno Juma; Respondent: Gowdensia Awino Juma
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 97 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Substitution After Abatement
Outcome
application dismissed; appeal abated; file closed
Judges
MS Shariff
Legal Topics
Abatement of Appeal, Substitution of Parties, Limitation Periods
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Abatement of Appeal Substitution of Parties Limitation Periods

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

Monica Aduda Sule

Appellant

Duncan Otieno Juma

Respondent

Gowdensia Awino Juma

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Substitution After Abatement

  1. 1 Whether the appeal could be revived or substitution allowed after abatement due to the lapse of one year following the death of the appellant.
  2. 2 Whether leave to extend the limitation period for substitution was sought prior to the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appeal abated on 21.2.2024, one year after the death of the appellant, as no application for substitution was made within the prescribed period and no leave was sought to extend the limitation period prior to the current application. The court emphasized that it is not its duty to accommodate lapses of parties in observing procedural requirements. Consequently, there was no substratum for substitution, and the application was disallowed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed; appeal abated; file closed

Orders

  • The application for substitution is disallowed.
  • No orders as to costs.