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 AppealStruck OutCivil Application arising from Civil Appeal No. 164 of 2018· [2024] KECA 366 (KLR)

Mburu & 5 others v Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited (Civil Application Sup 22 of 2019) [2024] KECA 366 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
12 April 2024
455 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Court of Appeal struck out an application to appeal to the Supreme Court because it was filed 48 days late instead of within the required 14 days.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a notice of motion dated 18th November 2019 seeking certification that an intended appeal to the Supreme Court raised a point of law of general public importance, and leave to appeal, from the Court of Appeal decision in Civil Appeal No. 164 of 2018 (Waki, Nambuye & Murgor, JJ.A.) delivered on 20th September 2019. The underlying appeal had concerned the alleged wrongful grant of a mareva injunction against the applicants and a claim for damages as compensation. The applicants' advocates filed written submissions dated 4th November 2023 but did not attend the hearing. The respondent, through Mohammed Muigai LLP, opposed the application, contending it was incompetent because it was filed outside the fourteen-day period prescribed by rule 42(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The court noted there was no dispute that the application was filed on 18th November 2019, forty-eight days after the judgment, and that no extension of time had been granted. It held the application incompetent and found it superfluous to consider whether the intended appeal raised a point of general public importance. The notice of motion was struck out with costs to the respondent. The judgment is a single, unanimous ruling of the full bench and contains no separate opinions or cited authorities.

Key legal issues

#
01

Timeliness and competence of an application for certification and leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under rule 42(b)

Holding

An application filed 48 days after the impugned judgment, where the Rules prescribe fourteen days and no extension of time was granted, is incompetent and must be struck out.

Reasoning

Rule 42 permits an application for a certificate either informally at the time of the decision or by motion or chamber summons within fourteen days after that decision. The applicants filed on 18th November 2019, forty-eight days after the judgment of 20th September 2019, and no extension of time had been granted. The court held the application incompetent and declined to consider whether the intended appeal raised a point of general public importance, finding it superfluous to do so.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An application for certification under rule 42(b) must be made within fourteen days after the decision against which appeal is desired; an application filed outside that period without an extension of time is incompetent and will be struck out without consideration of its merits.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated 18th November 2019 is struck out with costs to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 42
On appeal from
Court of Appeal of Kenya
Civil Appeal No. 164 of 2018
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 42 of the Court of Appeal Rules - certification that a point of law of general public importance is involved, as a precondition to appeal to the Supreme Court

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mburu & 5 others v Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited (Civil Application Sup 22 of 2019) [2024] KECA 366 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Civil Application arising from Civil Appeal No. 164 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2024/366/eng@2024-04-12

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