[2019] KEHC 37 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant had repeatedly failed to comply with court orders to file and serve the record of appeal, despite being given ample opportunity and reminders. The absence of the appellant's counsel on the date set for confirmation, and the lack of evidence of service of notice to the respondent,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 37 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Wycliffe Mathews; Respondent: William Ochieng Oloo
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 12 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Record of Appeal, Non Compliance With Court Orders
- 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
Wycliffe Mathews
Appellant
William Ochieng Oloo
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to failure to file and serve the record of appeal within the stipulated timelines.
- 2 Whether the appellant complied with court orders regarding the filing and service of the record of appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant had repeatedly failed to comply with court orders to file and serve the record of appeal, despite being given ample opportunity and reminders. The absence of the appellant's counsel on the date set for confirmation, and the lack of evidence of service of notice to the respondent, demonstrated a lack of diligence and seriousness in prosecuting the appeal. The court concluded that there was no alternative but to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, as the appellant's conduct had impeded the progress and disposal of the matter.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- No orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT SIAYA
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12 OF 2017
WYCLIFFE MATHEWS.............................................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
WILLIAM OCHIENG OLOO.................................................RESPONDENT
(Appeal from the Judgment and Decree of Ukwala PMCC No. 30 of 2015 delivered on the 21st July, 2017 before S.R.M. Ukwala)
RULING
1. On the 24. 9.2018 the appellant was directed to file and serve a record of appeal within 14 days of the order. They were served with the order for mention on 21. 1.2019 and they attended, requesting the court to grant them until today to confirm filing and service of record of appeal. To date no record of appeal has been filed and served yet the trial court record and the proceedings of the lower court have been availed before this court since 18. 8.2018.
2. Today the appellant’s Counsel who took today’s date is absent and albeit they were directed to serve the Respondent with a Notice, there is no evidence of service.
3. The Court was to direct on the mode of disposal of the appeal. As the appellant has failed to comply with court orders to compile, file and serve a record of appeal within stipulated timelines to enable the court proceed to direct on the disposal of the appeal, having been notified to so comply on several occasions, I have no option but to dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution.
4. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution with no orders as to costs. File closed.
5. Orders accordingly.
Dated, Signed and Delivered at Siaya this 19th day of February, 2019
R.E. ABURILI
JUDGE