Awuor v Onyango & another
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal allowed a brother to replace a deceased appellant in an ongoing appeal, confirming that appellate substitutions follow Rule 99, not the Civil Procedure Rules.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Substitution of a deceased appellant under Rule 99
The motion for substitution of the deceased appellant by his brother was allowed, the 1st respondent not opposing it.
The applicant moved under Rule 99(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules to substitute the appellant who expired on June 29, 2020, evidenced by a burial permit. The 1st respondent's counsel indicated no opposition. Provisions of Order 24 of the Civil Procedure Rules cited by the applicant were inapplicable and ignored. The court allowed the motion with no orders as to costs.
Legal principles established
#- Order 24 of the Civil Procedure Rules does not apply to substitution of a party on appeal under Rule 99 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
Court orders
#- 1.Motion dated October 29, 2021 allowed
- 2.No orders as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 99(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Awuor v Onyango & another", Case Analysis (2022). Civil Application 57 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2022/627/eng@2022-07-08
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.