Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedCourt of Appeal Appeal (number not stated in judgment; companion to C.A. No. 146 of 1998)· [1999] KECA 140 (KLR)

COME TO AFRICA SAFARIS LIMITED vs BARCLAYS BANK OF KENYA LIMITED [1999] KECA 140 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
19 January 1999
RKR. O. KwachPhilip Kiptoo TunoiP. K. TunoiEOE. Owuor
140 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal allowed Come to Africa Safaris' unopposed appeal against Barclays Bank, wiping out the High Court's 1998 ruling.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a very short, unopposed appeal decided by a three-judge bench of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi, comprising Kwach, Tunoi and Owour, JJ.A., in a single judgment of the court delivered on 19th January 1999. The appeal was brought by Come to Africa Safaris Limited against Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited, challenging a ruling and order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Kuloba, J.) dated 25th June 1998 in H.C.C.C. No. 1941 of 1995. Rather than restating its reasoning, the Court of Appeal adopted the reasons it had already given in its judgment in C.A. No. 146 of 1998, a companion appeal, and noted that the present appeal was not opposed. On that basis the court allowed the appeal as prayed, set aside the ruling and order made by Kuloba, J. on 25th June 1998, and made no order as to costs. The judgment contains no separate opinions, no dissents, no citation of authorities or statutes, and no independent legal analysis; its precedential value lies entirely in the disposition and in the reasons contained in the companion judgment in C.A. No. 146 of 1998, which must be read together with this one. The decision below was set aside, and each party bears its own costs by virtue of the no-costs order.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the appeal should be allowed as prayed

Holding

The appeal, being unopposed, was allowed as prayed for the reasons given in the judgment in C.A. No. 146 of 1998, and the ruling and order of Kuloba, J. dated 25th June 1998 were set aside.

Reasoning

The Court of Appeal adopted the reasons already given in its judgment in C.A. No. 146 of 1998, a companion appeal, rather than restating them. Noting that the appeal was not opposed by the respondent, the court allowed the appeal as prayed, set aside the High Court ruling and order of 25th June 1998, and made no order as to costs. The judgment contains no independent reasoning beyond the cross-reference to the companion appeal.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The Court of Appeal's ruling in C.A. No. 146 of 1998 governs the disposition of this unopposed appeal, which was allowed on the same reasons and the High Court ruling of 25 June 1998 set aside.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal is allowed as prayed
  2. 2.The ruling and order made by Kuloba, J. on 25th June, 1998 are set aside
  3. 3.No order as to costs
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
H.C.C.C. No. 1941 of 1995
Jurisdiction invoked
Appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over a ruling and order of the High Court (specific statutory provision not stated in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "COME TO AFRICA SAFARIS LIMITED vs BARCLAYS BANK OF KENYA LIMITED [1999] KECA 140 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1999). Court of Appeal Appeal (number not stated in judgment; companion to C.A. No. 146 of 1998). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1999/140/eng@1999-01-19

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.