[2002] KECA 321 (KLR)
The Court found that the application for adjournment was made on reasonable grounds, specifically the illness of counsel, as evidenced by an unchallenged medical report from a reputable hospital. The Court reasoned that refusing the adjournment would result in one of the main parties being unrepresented, thereby...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2002] KECA 321 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Uhuru Highway Development Ltd & Others; Respondent: Central Bank of Kenya Deposit Fund Protection Board & 3 Others
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 286 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Application for Adjournment Pending Hearing of Appeal
- Outcome
- application for adjournment allowed
- Legal Topics
- Adjournment Application, Illness of Counsel, Fair Hearing Rights
- 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
Uhuru Highway Development Ltd & Others
Appellant
Central Bank of Kenya Deposit Fund Protection Board & 3 Others
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Adjournment Pending Hearing of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for adjournment should be granted on the grounds of counsel's illness.
- 2 Whether refusal of adjournment would occasion injustice to a party.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that the application for adjournment was made on reasonable grounds, specifically the illness of counsel, as evidenced by an unchallenged medical report from a reputable hospital. The Court reasoned that refusing the adjournment would result in one of the main parties being unrepresented, thereby occasioning injustice. In the interests of justice, the application for adjournment was allowed, and the appeal was removed from the cause list to be fixed for hearing on priority basis.
Court Disposition
application for adjournment allowed
Orders
- The appeal is taken out of today’s and tomorrow’s cause list and stood over to new dates to be obtained in the Registry on a priority basis.
- Deputy Registrar to assign at least four days for the hearing of the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
CIVIL APPEAL NO 286 OF 2001
May 22, 2002
CORAM: OMOLO, TUNOI & LAKHA
UHURU HIGHWAY DEVELOPMENT LTD & OTHERS..................................................................APPELLANTS
V
CENTRAL BANK OF KENYA DEPOSIT FUND PROTECTION BOARD & 3 OTHERS............RESPONDENTS
Civil Practice and Procedure - adjournment – granting an application for adjournment – factors that a court considers before allowing such application.
The advocate of one of the respondents applied for an adjournment due to the fact that he was ill. A medical report from a reputable hospital was produced to support the application. The authenticity of the report was not challenged.
Held:
1. The application for adjournment in this case was made upon reasonable grounds, namely, an illness or incapacity to represent one of the main parties to the appeal.
2. If an adjournment was refused in this case, one of the parties to the appeal would not be represented thus occasioning it injustice.
Application allowed.
Cases
No cases referred to.
Statutes
No statutes referred.
May 22, 2002, the following Ruling of the Court was delivered. We think that the medical report that has been shown to us is from a reputable hospital; and moreover, no one has challenged its authenticity. It would appear therefore that Mr Ojiambo is prevented from a reasonable cause, namely, an illness or incapacity to represent the firm of M/s Oraro & Company which is one of the main parties to the appeal. We believe that if we refuse adjournment it would mean that the said firm would not be represented in the appeal and thus occasioning it injustice. In the interests of justice we allow the application for adjournment. The appeal is taken out of to-day’s and to-morrow’s cause list and is stood over to new dates to be obtained in the Registry on a priority basis.
We advise the Deputy Registrar to assign at least four days for the hearing of the appeal. We order that the costs of today shall be in the appeal in any event.