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 AppealPartially AllowedCivil Application No. NAI.139 of 2000 (UR. 63/2000)

Oloololo Game Ranch Limited v 1. Abercrombie & Kent Ltd & 1 other

Court of Appeal
15 November 2000
AAA.M. AkiwumiPhilip Kiptoo TunoiP.K. TunoiMOM. O'Kubasu
227 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 struck out a Notice of Appeal for naming the wrong party, showing appeal paperwork errors can end an appeal entirely.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short interlocutory ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi (Akiwumi, Tunoi and O'Kubasu JJ.A) delivered on 15 November 2000 in Civil Application No. NAI.139 of 2000 (UR. 63/2000). The respondents applied to strike out the Notice of Appeal filed by Oloololo Game Ranch Limited on 21 December 1999 against the judgment of Oguk J of the High Court dated 20 December 1999 in H.C.C.C. No.3457 of 1995. The court held that the Notice of Appeal was defective because it did not contain the proper name of the second defendant, the Ilkarekeshe Group Trust Registered Trustees, among those dissatisfied with the High Court judgment and intending to appeal. Counsel for the intended appellants conceded the defect; he had subsequently sought leave in a separate application, Civil Application No. NAI 230/2000, for extension of time to amend the defective notice. Notwithstanding that concession and the pending amendment application, the court held it had no option but to allow the present application. It struck out the Notice of Appeal dated and filed 21 December 1999 and assessed the costs of the application at KShs 2,000. The ruling is a single judgment of the full bench with no separate opinions and cites no authorities or statutory provisions. Its binding significance lies in confirming that a Notice of Appeal omitting the proper name of a party against whom the appeal is intended is defective and may be struck out.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a Notice of Appeal failing to name the proper party against whom the appeal is intended is fatal

Holding

Yes; the omission of the proper name of the second defendant rendered the Notice of Appeal defective and it was struck out with costs.

Reasoning

The court found the Notice of Appeal did not contain the proper name of the second defendant among those dissatisfied with the judgment of Oguk J. Counsel for the intended appellants conceded the defect and had separately sought extension of time to amend in Civil Application No. NAI 230/2000. Given the conceded defect, the court held it had no option but to strike out the notice, with costs assessed at KShs 2,000.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • A Notice of Appeal that omits the proper name of a party against whom the intended appeal lies is defective and liable to be struck out, even where the defect is conceded and an application to amend has been made in a separate application.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Appeal dated 21.12.99 and filed on 21.12.99 is struck out
  2. 2.Costs of the application assessed at KShs 2,000
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
H.C.C.C. No.3457 of 1995
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal under its rules (Civil Application, UR 63/2000); no specific constitutional or statutory provision quoted in the ruling

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Oloololo Game Ranch Limited v 1. Abercrombie & Kent Ltd & 1 other", Case Analysis (2000). Civil Application No. NAI.139 of 2000 (UR. 63/2000). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2000/109/eng@2000-11-15

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