Kenneth Imbahale Akibaya v City Council of Nairobi & another [1996] KECA 162 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal dismissed a land dispute appeal because the property had already been transferred and registered to another party under an earlier judgment.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the appeal should be adjourned and heard by a five-judge bench given the appellant's objection to Akiwumi & Shah, JJ.A
- 2.Whether the appeal had been overtaken by events, the suit property having been transferred and registered in the second respondent's name
- 3.Whether the appeal had merit
Key legal issues
#Effect of the appeal being overtaken by events
Where the subject matter of a suit has been transferred and registered in another party's name pursuant to a prior judgment of the Court of Appeal, the appeal discloses no merit and must be dismissed.
The court was informed that Plot L.R. No. 37/566 Nairobi had been ordered transferred to and registered in the name of the second respondent following the judgment in Civil Appeal No. 126/91. Given that the subject matter of the dispute had thus been resolved and extinguished, the court saw no merit in continuing with the appeal and dismissed it with costs.
Objection to bench composition and request for a five-judge bench
An application for adjournment and for a five-judge bench based on objections to two judges of appeal may be rejected as frivolous.
The appellant objected to the participation of Akiwumi & Shah, JJ.A and sought a five-judge bench. The court rejected the application, describing it as absolutely frivolous. The appellant then gathered his papers and left the court, and the appeal proceeded in his absence.
Legal principles established
#- An appeal is rendered nugatory and must fail where the subject matter of the suit has been overtaken by events, having been transferred and registered in a third party's name pursuant to a prior judgment of the Court of Appeal.
Court orders
#- 1.The appellant's application for adjournment and for a five-judge bench was rejected
- 2.The appeal was dismissed with costs to the respondents
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- H.C.C.C. No. Misc. 359 of 1984
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal to the Court of Appeal under the Kenyan appellate framework (specific provision not stated in the judgment)
Relief refused
#Adjournment of the appeal and reconstitution before a five-judge bench
The court considered the application without merit
The substantive appeal
The subject matter had been transferred and registered in the second respondent's name following a prior judgment of the Court of Appeal
Costs
Costs of the appeal awarded to the respondents
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
We reject the application as we consider it absolutely frivolous.
this appeal has been overtaken by events as the subject matter of the suit namely Plot L.R. No. 37/566 Nairobi has been ordered transferred to and registered in the name of Mr V.K. Raniga, the second respondent following the judgment of this Court in Civil Appeal No. 126/91
In the circumstances, we see no merit in this appeal and we order it to be dismissed with costs to the respondents.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenneth Imbahale Akibaya v City Council of Nairobi & another [1996] KECA 162 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1996). Civil Appeal No. 181 of 1993. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1996/162/eng@1996-09-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.