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 AppealOtherCivil Appeal (Application) E344 of 2022· [2022] KECA 1352 (KLR)

Kenya Pipeline Company Limited v Kenya Oil Company Limited & another

Court of Appeal
2 December 2022
1,678 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that appealing a decision striking out pleadings needs no court permission, but Kenya Pipeline still had to file its appeal quickly.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling by Ngenye-Macharia, JA (sitting as a single Judge) on a notice of motion by Kenya Pipeline Company Limited seeking extension of time, leave to appeal, and a stay of enforcement of an arbitrator's reassessment award. The dispute arose from a 1999 agreement referring disputes to arbitration; an initial award was set aside by the High Court and the matter remitted, producing a reassessed award of USD 19,758,594.70 in 2016. On August 18, 2022, Okwany, J. held the High Court lacked jurisdiction over the applicant's challenge because the reassessment orders emanated from the Court of Appeal. The applicant then sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal out of time. The respondents argued the court lacked jurisdiction because leave had not first been sought in the High Court and no appeal lies from a section 35 Arbitration Act decision. The single Judge held that the matter before him was not the arbitral award but the High Court's striking out of the applicant's pleadings for want of jurisdiction; under section 75 of the Civil Procedure Act read with order 43 of the Civil Procedure Rules, an appeal from the striking out of pleadings lies as of right without leave. The application for extension of time and leave was therefore misplaced and devoid of merit. The prayer for stay was struck out as not falling for a single Judge's consideration. However, since the statutory timeframe for filing an appeal had run out, the Judge, in the interest of justice, directed the applicant to file its record of appeal within 30 days, with costs in the intended appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over the application

Holding

The court had jurisdiction because the intended appeal was against the High Court's striking out of pleadings for want of jurisdiction, an appeal lying as of right without leave.

Reasoning

Section 75 of the Civil Procedure Act read with order 43 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules governs appeals. Order 43 rule 1(2) requires leave only for appeals from other orders under the Rules. The matter before the court was not the arbitral award but the High Court's decision striking out the applicant's pleadings for lack of jurisdiction; an appeal from striking out of pleadings requires no leave, so the intended appeal was properly before the court.

02

Extension of time and leave to appeal

Holding

The application for extension of time and leave was misplaced because leave was not required; the notice of appeal had been filed within the statutory period.

Reasoning

The High Court ruling was delivered on August 18, 2022; a notice of appeal was filed and served on August 26, 2022, within the 14-day statutory period. Having found that leave of the High Court was not a requirement, the application seeking extension of time and leave to appeal had no foundation and was devoid of merit.

p. 4
03

Stay of enforcement of the arbitral reassessment

Holding

The prayer for stay was struck out as it does not fall for consideration by a single Judge.

Reasoning

The applicant sought a stay of enforcement and/or further proceedings based on the arbitrator's reassessment of loss and damages pending hearing of the application and/or intended appeal. The single Judge held that such a prayer does not fall for his consideration and struck it out.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • An appeal arising from the striking out of pleadings lies as of right and does not require the leave of the court under order 43 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  • Where the statutory timeframe for filing an appeal has run out, a single Judge may, in the interest of justice, direct filing of the record of appeal within a stated period.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Prayer for stay of enforcement of further proceedings based on the arbitrator's reassessment of loss and damages struck out
  2. 2.Applicant ordered to file its record of appeal within 30 days of the ruling
  3. 3.Costs shall be in the intended appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 48
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 50(1)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159(2)(d)
  • Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Chapter 9Section 3
  • Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Chapter 9Section 3A
  • Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Chapter 9Section 3B
  • Arbitration Act, No 4 of 1995Section 10
  • Arbitration Act, No 4 of 1995Section 35
  • Arbitration Act, No 4 of 1995Section 39
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2022Rule 4
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2022Rule 41(1)(b)
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2022Rule 44
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2022Rule 45
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 75
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 43 rule 1

Cases cited (7)

  • Imperial Bank Limited (In Receivership) & another v Alnashir Popat & 18 others
    [2018] eKLR
  • Leo Sila Mutiso vs Rose Wangari Mwangi
    CA No Nai 255 of 1997
  • Julius Kamau Kithaka v Wanguguru Kithaka Nyaga & 2 others
    [2013] eKLR
  • Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 7 others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Mwangi S. Kimenyi v Attorney General & another
    [2014] eKLR
  • Kenya Airports Authority v Mitu-Bell Welfare Society & Another
    [2014] eKLR
  • Nyutu Agrovet Limited v Airtel Networks Kenya Limited; Chartered Institute of Arbitrators-Kenya Branch (Interested Party)
    [2019] eKLR
On appeal from
High Court
High Court Miscellaneous Application No 380 of 2016 – Kenya Pipeline Company Limited v Kenya Oil Company Limited & Kobil Petroleum Limited
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 3, 3A & 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act (Cap 9); Rules 4, 41(1)(b), 44 & 45 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022; articles 48, 50(1) and 159(2)(d) of the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (5)

#

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, "Kenya Pipeline Company Limited v Kenya Oil Company Limited & another", Case Analysis (2022). Civil Appeal (Application) E344 of 2022. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2022/1352/eng@2022-12-02

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