Noradhco Kenya Limited v Loria Michele [1998] KECA 3 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that filing a notice of appeal doesn't block you from seeking review of the same 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 court should extend time for filing a fresh notice of appeal and the record of appeal
- 2.Whether lodging a notice of appeal is tantamount to preferring an appeal, thereby depriving a party of the right to apply for review under Order 44 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules
- 3.Whether the applicant's intended appeal is arguable and whether there was inordinate delay
Key legal issues
#Whether a pending notice of appeal ousts the jurisdiction of the superior court to entertain an application for review
No. A notice of appeal is only notice of intention to appeal; an appeal is instituted only when the record is lodged, fees paid and security provided. The superior court therefore had jurisdiction to entertain the review application notwithstanding the pending notice of appeal.
The court relied on Haryanto v ED & F. Man (Sugar) Ltd, where the Court of Appeal held there was jurisdiction to entertain review notwithstanding a notice of appeal, and on Motel Schweitzer v Thomas Edward Cunningham, which held that a notice of appeal is notice of intention to exercise a right of appeal and that an appeal is instituted only on lodging the record, paying fees and providing security. The reasoning in the struck-out appeal that the notice of appeal divested the applicant of the right of review was rejected.
Whether extension of time should be granted
Yes. The applicant had an arguable appeal, the original appeal was struck out summarily without being heard on the merits, and there was no inordinate delay.
The proposed memorandum of appeal raised arguable grounds, including that the goods supplied were uncustomed goods illegally imported and were seized by customs authorities, so that the consideration totally failed. The appeal had been struck out in limine for a procedural defect, and refusing an extension would work injustice by depriving the applicant of the right to have its appeal determined on the merits.
Legal principles established
#- The filing of a notice of appeal does not deprive a party of the right to apply for review under Order 44 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules; a notice of appeal is not tantamount to preferring an appeal.
- An appeal is not instituted in the Court of Appeal until the record of appeal is lodged, fees paid and security lodged.
Court orders
#- 1.Extension of time for filing the notice of appeal under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules
- 2.The applicant to file the notice of appeal within 7 days of the order
- 3.The applicant to file the record of appeal within a further 21 days of filing the notice of appeal
- 4.Costs of the notice of motion to abide the result of the intended appeal
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya
- Summary judgment of 9.8.1994; review dismissed 31st July 1996 by Lady Justice Ang'awa
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rules 1(2), 4, 74 and 81(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules (extension of time jurisdiction under rule 4)
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.
The filing of a notice of appeal in my humble view cannot deprive a party of his right under O.44 r. 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules to apply for review and the notice of appeal cannot be tantamount to preferring an appeal.
I therefore agree with Mr. Pandya that the applicant has, at least, an arguable appeal, and that the appeal originally filed was struck out in Limini without it being on merits.
I grant the applicants notice of motion and hereby extend the time for filing the notice of appeal exercising my power under rule 4 of the Rules and order that the applicant shall file the notice of appeal within 7 days of this order and shall file the record of appeal within further 21 days of the filing of the said notice of appeal.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment records two conflicting certified copies of the order striking out Civil Appeal No. 140 of 1997, giving different reasons; the judge could not resolve this at the time, though a postscript states the original record supports only the applicant's version.
The judgment contains a duplicated passage in its narration of the striking out of the appeal.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Noradhco Kenya Limited v Loria Michele [1998] KECA 3 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1998). Notice of Motion under rules 1(2), 4, 74 and 81(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules (arising from Civil Appeal No. 140 of 1997). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1998/3/eng@1998-01-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.