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 AppealAllowedAdmiralty Cause 352 of 2012· [2022] KECA 1233 (KLR)

Corporate Insurance Company Limited v Rainbow Cabs & Car Hire Limited

Court of Appeal
4 November 2022
HOH. A. OmondiKLK. I. LaibutaMGM. Gachoka
631 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi (H. A. Omondi, K. I. Laibuta and P. M. Gachoka, JJA) on a notice of motion dated December 20, 2017 by Corporate Insurance Company Limited seeking reinstatement of its appeal, which had been dismissed for non-attendance on November 27, 2017. The appeal lay from a judgment of the High Court (Mugo, J.) delivered on February 17, 2011 in High Court Civil Case No. 415 of 2009. The application was brought under Rule 102(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2010, Sections 3A and 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Article 159 of the Constitution. It was supported by an affidavit of Gertrude Chepng'etich, who explained that she erroneously diarised the hearing as a High Court mention and failed to file the hearing notice, resulting in the dismissal in the appellant's absence. The respondent filed no replying affidavit or submissions. The court found the application was filed within 30 days of dismissal as required by Rule 105(3). While censuring the advocates' mistakes as interfering with the smooth flow of cases, the court held it would be harsh to lock the applicant out of justice. The application was allowed, the appeal reinstated for hearing, with no order as to costs. The decision below was not disturbed at this stage; the reinstated appeal remains pending.

Key legal issues

#
01

Timeliness of the reinstatement application

Holding

The application filed on December 20, 2017 was within 30 days of the November 27, 2017 dismissal as required by Rule 105(3).

Reasoning

The court compared the date of dismissal with the date of filing and found the application fell within the 30-day window prescribed by Rule 105(3) of the Court of Appeal Rules, satisfying the threshold requirement for reinstatement.

02

Effect of counsel's mistakes on reinstatement

Holding

Although counsel's errors in diarising and filing the hearing notice were not condoned, it would be harsh to deny the applicant a hearing where the application was filed in time.

Reasoning

The court identified two mistakes by the appellants' advocates: wrongly recording the appeal in the diary and failing to file the hearing notice. It weighed these against access to justice and the timely filing of the reinstatement application, concluding that dismissal should not stand.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An appeal dismissed for non-attendance may be reinstated where the reinstatement application is filed within 30 days of dismissal under Rule 105(3), even where the dismissal resulted from counsel's mistake.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated December 20, 2017 is allowed
  2. 2.The appeal dismissed on November 27, 2017 is reinstated for hearing
  3. 3.No order as to costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2010Rule 102(1)
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2010Rule 105(3)
  • Appellate Jurisdiction ActSections 3A & 3B
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 159
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
High Court Civil Case No. 415 of 2009
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 102(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2010; Sections 3A & 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act; Article 159 of the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (1)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Corporate Insurance Company Limited v Rainbow Cabs & Car Hire Limited", Case Analysis (2022). Admiralty Cause 352 of 2012. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2022/1233/eng@2022-11-04

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