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 AppealPartially AllowedCivil Application E026 of 2023· [2024] KECA 1911 (KLR)

Dahman & another (As Administrators of the Estate of Mariam Binti Said) v Sudi

Court of Appeal
12 July 2024
1,608 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that an appeal not filed on time is automatically treated as withdrawn, ending a years-long land dispute stalemate.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicants, administrators of the estate of Mariam Binti Said, moved the Court of Appeal at Mombasa by Notice of Motion dated 26th June 2023 under rules 85 and 86 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022, seeking to strike out, or in the alternative to have deemed withdrawn, the respondent's Notice of appeal lodged on 23rd October 2019 against the judgment of the Environment and Land Court at Malindi (Olola, J.) delivered on 8th October 2012 case. They deposed that the respondent had taken no steps for over three years to institute or prosecute the appeal, had declined to approve a draft decree or pay typing deposits, yet continued to enjoy a stay of execution granted by the trial court. The respondent did not appear despite service. The Court held that the primary strike-out prayer failed because the proviso to rule 86 requires such applications within 30 days of service of the Notice of appeal, and the application was filed years out of time. However, under rule 85, a party who fails to institute an appeal within the appointed time is deemed to have withdrawn the notice; applying Mae Properties Limited v Joseph Kibe, the Court held the deeming is mandatory and sets in the moment the appointed time lapses. Finding no explanation for the delay of over three years, the Court allowed the application and deemed the Notice of appeal withdrawn with costs to the applicants.

Key legal issues

#
01

Applicability of the proviso to rule 86

Holding

The applicants' strike-out application, filed over three years after service of the Notice of appeal, was out of time and rule 86 was inapplicable.

Reasoning

The proviso to rule 86 requires a strike-out application to be brought within 30 days of service of the notice of appeal or record of appeal. The applicants conceded service on 31st October 2019 but filed on 26th June 2023. The rule was therefore inapplicable, and the court could not strike out the notice under that rule.

p. 3
02

Deeming a Notice of appeal withdrawn under rule 85

Holding

Where a party fails to institute an appeal within the appointed time, the notice of appeal is deemed withdrawn, and the Court may so declare on application, with costs.

Reasoning

Rule 85 prescribes in mandatory, peremptory terms that a party who fails to institute an appeal within the appointed time shall be deemed to have withdrawn the notice. The deeming operates automatically on lapse of time. The respondent filed no record of appeal for over three years, offered no explanation, and did not respond to the application; the Court therefore intervened under rule 85.

Legal principles established

#
  • Under rule 85, a party who fails to institute an appeal within the appointed time is deemed to have withdrawn the notice of appeal, and the deeming effect sets in automatically upon lapse of time
  • The power to strike out an appeal is discretionary and case-specific

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 26th June 2023 is allowed
  2. 2.The respondent's Notice of appeal dated 22nd October 2019 and lodged on 23rd October 2019 is deemed as withdrawn with costs to the applicants

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2022rule 85
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2022rule 86

Cases cited (2)

  • Standard Ltd & another v Onchieku
    (Civil Application 134 of 2019) [2023] KECA 1275 (KLR)

    That the power to strike out an appeal is discretionary and exercised on the peculiar circumstances of each case.

  • Mae Properties Limited v Joseph Kibe & another
    [2017] eKLR

    Interpretation of the deeming provision: failure to institute an appeal within the appointed time results in deemed withdrawal of the notice of appeal.

On appeal from
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Malindi ELC Case Number 24 of 2012
Jurisdiction invoked
Rules 85 and 86 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Dahman & another (As Administrators of the Estate of Mariam Binti Said) v Sudi", Case Analysis (2024). Civil Application E026 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2024/1911/eng@2024-07-12

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