Peter Mwaura Kamau v Kenya Union of Post Primary Education Teachers (Kuppet) & 3 others [2014] KECA 370 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal refused to let a man appeal without paying court fees because he failed to prove he truly could not afford it, and ignored sworn claims he was wealthy.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicant qualified as a pauper entitled to lodge an appeal without paying fees and security under Rule 115
The applicant was not a pauper; he failed to rebut sworn allegations that he was a man of means, amounting to concealment of material facts or lack of candour
The applicant deponed to illness, school fees arrears and loan default, but the respondents swore he was a man of means running businesses, farming, and hiring successive advocates. The applicant neither sought leave to file a supplementary affidavit nor otherwise responded, so the averments stood admitted. The Registrar's report finding destitution could not be accepted in the face of the applicant's failure of candour.
Whether the intended appeal had a reasonable possibility of success
The Judge below had jurisdiction to hear the review and there were grounds for allowing it, so no arguable prospects were shown
The review ruling of Maureen Onyango, J found an error apparent on the face of the record as to the date of the consent order, and she had jurisdiction to hear the matter notwithstanding the transfer of Wasilwa, J. Given these findings, the applicant could not demonstrate a reasonable possibility of success for purposes of Rule 115.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant seeking leave to appeal without payment of fees under Rule 115 must satisfy the Court both that he lacks means and that the appeal has a reasonable possibility of success
- Unrebutted averments in a replying affidavit are taken to be true and admitted; an applicant who does not respond to serious allegations against him cannot rely on contrary reports
- A Judge other than the one who made the original ruling may hear an application for review where the original Judge is no longer attached to the station
Court orders
#- 1.The application under Rules 47 and 115 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2010 seeking leave to lodge an appeal without payment of court fees and security for costs was dismissed
- 2.No order as to costs
- On appeal from
- Industrial Court of Kenya
- Industrial Cause No. 980 of 2012
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rules 47 and 115 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2010 (application for leave to lodge an appeal without prior payment of court fees and security for costs)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Peter Mwaura Kamau v Kenya Union of Post Primary Education Teachers (Kuppet) & 3 others [2014] KECA 370 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Civil Application No. NAI 114 of 2014 (UR 92/2014). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2014/370/eng@2014-10-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.