[2003] KECA 107 (KLR)

[2003] KECA 107 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent took all necessary steps within the prescribed time to obtain the proceedings and ruling. The delay in posting the letter notifying the availability of the documents was due to an error in the address and was not attributable to the respondent or its advocates. The certificate of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2003] KECA 107 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Wilfred Odhiambo Musingo; Respondent: Habo Agencies Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 254 of 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
AB Shah, E Owuor
Legal Topics
Appeal Timelines, Certificate of Delay, Service of Process, Striking Out Notice
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Appeal Timelines Certificate of Delay Service of Process Striking Out Notice

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wilfred Odhiambo Musingo

Applicant

Habo Agencies Limited

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 lodge the appeal within the time stipulated by Rule 81 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in posting the letter notifying availability of proceedings was attributable to the respondent or its advocates.
  3. 3 Whether the certificate of delay issued by the Deputy Registrar was valid and accurate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent took all necessary steps within the prescribed time to obtain the proceedings and ruling. The delay in posting the letter notifying the availability of the documents was due to an error in the address and was not attributable to the respondent or its advocates. The certificate of delay issued by the Deputy Registrar was found to be valid and there was no evidence to suggest impropriety or inaccuracy. Consequently, the appeal was filed within the time allowed by Rule 81 of the Court of Appeal Rules, and there was no basis to strike out the notice of appeal.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application to strike out the notice of appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.