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 AppealAllowedCivil Application 126 of 2019· [2022] KECA 456 (KLR)

Muthuri & another v Karigi

Court of Appeal
18 March 2022
KLK. I. Laibuta
325 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 allowed a deceased party's replacement in an ongoing land appeal, showing courts fix wrong rule citations instead of rejecting applications.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short interlocutory ruling of the Court of Appeal (KI Laibuta, JA) on a Notice of Motion dated 19th October 2021 by Joshua Mwenda Ikiara, seeking to be substituted for the deceased respondent, M'Ikiara Karigi, in a pending appeal against a ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Meru (Lucy N. Mbugua, J.) delivered on 3rd October 2018 in ELC Case No. 77 of 2004. The respondent died on 26th June 2021. The applicant relied on a supporting affidavit, a certificate of death, and a Limited Grant of Letters of Administration Ad Litem issued to him on 26th August 2021. The motion, though erroneously brought under Rule 96 of the Court of Appeal Rules (which governs withdrawal of appeals), was unopposed; counsel for the respondent filed written submissions and did not oppose it. The court allowed the motion under Rule 99, the correct provision governing substitution of parties on appeal, made Joshua Mwenda Ikiara a party to the appeal in place of the deceased respondent, and ordered that there be no orders as to costs. The ruling does not disturb the decision below; it merely permits the appeal to proceed against the substituted party. No authorities were cited and no substantive issues of law were determined.

Key legal issues

#
01

Substitution of a deceased respondent in a pending appeal

Holding

The court allowed substitution of the deceased respondent by the holder of a limited grant ad litem, the application being unopposed and supported by a death certificate and limited grant.

Reasoning

The single judge considered the motion, supporting affidavit, death certificate of the deceased respondent, and the Limited Grant of Letters of Administration Ad Litem issued to the applicant, together with the respondent's counsel's written submissions. Noting the motion was unopposed, the court allowed it under Rule 99 of the Court of Appeal Rules, the correct provision for substitution, notwithstanding the motion's erroneous invocation of Rule 96, which concerns withdrawal of appeals.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • An application to substitute a deceased party in a pending appeal is properly governed by Rule 99 of the Court of Appeal Rules, even where the motion erroneously cites another rule.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 19th October 2021 is allowed in accordance with Rule 99 of the Court of Appeal Rules
  2. 2.Joshua Mwenda Ikiara substituted for the deceased respondent and made a party to the appeal
  3. 3.No orders as to costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 96
  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 99
On appeal from
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Environment and Land Court Case No. 77 of 2004
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 99 of the Court of Appeal Rules (substitution of a deceased party on appeal)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Muthuri & another v Karigi", Case Analysis (2022). Civil Application 126 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2022/456/eng@2022-03-18

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