MARY WAMBURA KIRITU vs BLUESHIELD INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [1999] KECA 137 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal ordered an insurer to hand over the insurance proposal form in its custody as a supplementary record, then postponed the appeal hearing.
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 proposal form filled in by the insured and held in the custody of the respondent should be produced for examination by the Court by way of a supplementary record
Key legal issues
#Production of a document in the respondent's custody for the appeal
The Court directed the respondent to produce the proposal form filled in by the insured, which was in its custody, by way of a supplementary record within 14 days, and adjourned the hearing to January 2000 in Nairobi.
This is a brief interlocutory ruling. The Court considered the proposal form necessary for examination at the hearing of the appeal and, rather than deciding the appeal, directed its inclusion in a supplementary record and stood the matter over. No substantive legal issue was determined and no decision below was disturbed at this stage.
Legal principles established
#- A party in custody of a document relevant to an appeal may be directed to produce it by way of a supplementary record of appeal within a fixed period
Court orders
#- 1.The matter was stood over to January, 2000 for hearing in Nairobi
- 2.The respondent to produce the proposal form filled in by the insured, in its custody, for examination by the Court by way of a supplementary record filed within 14 days
- 3.Costs reserved
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nyeri
- H.C.C.C. No. 317 of 1996
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over a decree of the High Court (the ruling does not state the specific constitutional or statutory provision invoked)
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.
This matter is stood over to January, 2000 for hearing in Nairobi when we expect that the proposal form filled in by the insured and in the custody of the respondent will be produced by the respondent for examination by this Court, by way of a supplementary record filed within 14 days from to-day.
Costs reserved.
Issues in the judgment
#The document is a brief interlocutory ruling of the Court of Appeal, not a full judgment; it contains no questions framed, no analysis of the decision below, and no substantive holdings, limiting the brief that can be drawn from it.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "MARY WAMBURA KIRITU vs BLUESHIELD INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [1999] KECA 137 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1999). Court of Appeal Appeal (Nyeri) arising from H.C.C.C. No. 317 of 1996. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1999/137/eng@1999-10-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.