DILIP KUMAR PREMCHAND SHAH & BHUPENDRA KUMAR PREMCHAND SHAH vs SUNCITY PROPERTIES LIMITED & INTERCOM INSURANCE LTD [2000] KECA 156 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal struck out a Notice of Appeal because the party never took any steps to actually file the appeal.
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 Notice of Appeal filed by the first respondent should be struck out under rule 80 of the Court of Appeal Rules
Key legal issues
#Whether an inordinate failure to take any steps to file an appeal justifies striking out a Notice of Appeal under rule 80
The court allowed the application and struck out the Notice of Appeal because the first respondent had taken no steps at all to file an appeal.
The applicants invoked rule 80 of the Court of Appeal Rules seeking to strike out the first respondent's Notice of Appeal. The first respondent did not appear by counsel or otherwise and offered no explanation. The court found it evident that the first respondent had taken no steps whatsoever to file an appeal, and on that basis allowed the application and struck out the Notice of Appeal, with no order as to costs.
Legal principles established
#- Where a party who has filed a Notice of Appeal takes no steps at all to file an appeal, the Notice of Appeal is liable to be struck out under rule 80 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Appeal dated 8th August, 1990 filed by the first respondent is struck out
- 2.No order as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 80 of the Court of Appeal Rules
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.
In the circumstances we allow the application and strike out the Notice of Appeal dated 8th August, 1990 with no order as to costs.
it is evident that it has taken no steps at all to file an appeal
Issues in the judgment
#The heading states 'CIVIL MISC APPL 305 OF 99' while the body refers to a Notice of Appeal dated 8th August, 1990 and filed on 10th August, 1990; the year discrepancy between the application number (1999) and the 1990 dates is unexplained on the face of the judgment.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "DILIP KUMAR PREMCHAND SHAH & BHUPENDRA KUMAR PREMCHAND SHAH vs SUNCITY PROPERTIES LIMITED & INTERCOM INSURANCE LTD [2000] KECA 156 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2000). Civil Misc Appl 305 of 1999. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2000/156/eng@2000-07-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.