Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealPartially AllowedCivil Appeal (Application) No. 149 of 2008· [2009] KECA 262 (KLR)

AKAMBA PUBLIC ROAD SERVICES LIMITED v BERNARD GITHATU KAMAU & another [2009] KECA 262 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
3 July 2009
1,567 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal struck out a notice of appeal because the appellant sat on it for over three years without filing the appeal record.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi (O'Kubasu, Waki and Onyango Otieno, JJA) on an application by Akamba Public Road Services Limited to strike out a notice of appeal lodged by the 1st respondent, Bernard Githatu Kamau, against the judgment of Ang'awa, J. delivered on 30th September 2004 in HCCC No. 63 of 2001. That decision was a test case on liability arising from a road traffic accident on 29th March 2000 on the Nakuru-Kericho highway; the High Court fixed 100% liability on the 1st respondent and absolved the applicant, with costs. The 1st respondent lodged a notice of appeal on 6th October 2004 and applied for certified proceedings, but never filed a record of appeal. More than three and a half years later, on 27th June 2008, the applicant moved to strike out the notice. The applicant's supporting affidavit detailed the 1st respondent's inaction, the prejudice caused by the pending appeal, and judgments already obtained against the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent filed no replying affidavit and made no substantive response at the hearing; the 2nd respondent did not oppose. The court held that the averments on oath stood uncontroverted, that there was no explanation for the delay, and that total inaction could not found any discretion in the 1st respondent's favour. Further delay would prejudice the applicant and numerous other litigants awaiting the outcome. The notice of appeal was struck out with costs to the applicant only. The ruling binds lower courts on the principle that intending appellants must diligently prosecute appeals.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether inordinate and unexplained delay in filing a record of appeal warrants striking out the notice of appeal

Holding

Yes. Where over three years elapsed after the notice of appeal without any step taken to obtain certified proceedings or file the record, and no replying affidavit or explanation was offered, the notice of appeal is struck out with costs.

Reasoning

The court found no explanation for the delay between lodging the notice of appeal on 6th October 2004 and the application of 27th June 2008. The applicant had obtained copies of the judgment and decree within two months, showing the court process was functioning. The unexplained inaction could not attract the court's discretion, and further delay would prejudice the applicant and other litigants awaiting the outcome of the test case on liability.

Legal principles established

#
  • A litigant who lodges a notice of appeal must diligently pursue the filing of the record of appeal; unexplained inaction over an extended period justifies striking out the notice of appeal.
  • Total inaction by an intending appellant and his advocates cannot found any discretion in his favour on an application to strike out a notice of appeal.
  • Uncontroverted averments on oath stand as the factual basis for the court's determination.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of appeal dated 6th October, 2004 is struck out
  2. 2.Costs of the application awarded to the applicant only
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
H.C.C.C. No. 63 of 2001
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over an intended appeal from the High Court; the application sought striking out of a notice of appeal lodged under the appellate rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "AKAMBA PUBLIC ROAD SERVICES LIMITED v BERNARD GITHATU KAMAU & another [2009] KECA 262 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2009). Civil Appeal (Application) No. 149 of 2008. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2009/262/eng@2009-07-03

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