AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealOtherCivil Appli 120 of 2002 (UR 65/2002)· [2009] KECA 193 (KLR)
1. Dimken Kenya Limited 2. Dick Maina Githaiga 3. Sarah Gathoni Maina 4. James Wahome Githaiga 5. Kellychard N. Githaiga v Barclays Bank of Kenya Moses Kamatu
Court of Appeal of Kenya
17 June 2009
233 words in judgment
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min briefThe bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal let Dimken withdraw its injunction application against Barclays Bank with no costs, because events had overtaken it.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#This is a very short procedural order of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi, not a reasoned appellate judgment. The applicants, led by counsel Mr. Mungai, had by notice of motion dated 16th May, 2002 sought an injunction pending the lodging and hearing of an intended appeal against a ruling of Ringera, J. dated 12th April, 2002 in H.C.C.C. No. 186 of 2000. At the hearing, counsel applied for leave to withdraw the application on the ground that it had been overtaken by events, the applicants having subsequently filed Civil Appeal No. 244 of 2002, which the Court had dismissed on 8th June, 2007. Counsel for the first respondent (Miss Karanja for Barclays Bank of Kenya) did not object. The court, composed of Omolo, Githinji and Aganyanya, JJ.A., granted leave and ordered the application withdrawn under Rule 55(6) of the Court of Appeal Rules, with no orders as to costs. The order is dated 17th June, 2009. Because the application was withdrawn rather than determined on its merits, the judgment contains no holdings, no binding propositions on lower courts, and no assessment of the merits of the underlying dispute or the ruling of the High Court. Its only forensic value is as an instance of the Court permitting withdrawal of a pending application without costs where the motion is overtaken by events and unopposed.
Key legal issues
#Legal principles established
#Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted to the applicants to withdraw the notice of motion dated 16th May, 2002, the application being withdrawn under Rule 55(6) of the Court of Appeal Rules
- 2.No orders as to costs
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- H.C.C.C. No. 186 of 2000
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Court of Appeal Rules, Rule 55(6) (application for injunction pending intended appeal under the Court's original appellate jurisdiction)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "1. Dimken Kenya Limited 2. Dick Maina Githaiga 3. Sarah Gathoni Maina 4. James Wahome Githaiga 5. Kellychard N. Githaiga v Barclays Bank of Kenya Moses Kamatu", Case Analysis (2009). Civil Appli 120 of 2002 (UR 65/2002). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2009/193/eng@2009-06-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.