Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOther· [2021] KEELC 3017 (KLR)

John Mbugua Muiruri v Kenya Commercial Bank Limited [2021] KEELC 3017 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
27 May 2021
2,014 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The High Court in Thika struck out an appeal filed nearly three months late, confirming that late appeals without leave give courts no jurisdiction.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a ruling by the High Court at Thika (L. Gacheru, J) on a Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 13th July 2020 raised by the Respondent/Objector against the Appellant/Applicant's Notice of Motion dated 10th June 2020, which sought an automatic stay of a subordinate court judgment and any execution arising from it pending appeal, under Order 40 rule 2 and Order 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Sections 3A, 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act. The Objector argued that the application was incompetent because no Memorandum of Appeal had been filed as required by Order 42 rule 1, the appeal was filed outside the 30-day period in Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act without leave, and the order sought to be stayed was a negative order incapable of execution. The Court applied the Mukisa Biscuits test and held the grounds were pure points of law properly raised as a preliminary objection. It found the ruling appealed against was delivered on 28th February 2020, the Notice of Appeal was filed only on 26th May 2020, and there was no leave or extension application; the appeal was therefore null and void. Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in James Mbatia Thuo and the Court of Appeal in Kaushik Panchamatia, the Court held it had no jurisdiction over an application with no appeal to anchor it, and that a negative order cannot be stayed. The preliminary objection was upheld, the application was struck out with costs to the Respondent/Objector, and the Memorandum of Appeal was declared null and void, leaving no appeal on record.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the grounds of the preliminary objection qualify as pure points of law

Holding

They do: failure to file a Memorandum of Appeal goes to jurisdiction, and whether an order is a negative order can be determined from the pleadings without ascertaining facts.

Reasoning

Applying the Mukisa Biscuits test, the Court found the grounds did not require factual inquiry or exercise of discretion. Absence of a Memorandum of Appeal means no appeal exists before the Court, which is a jurisdictional point; the character of the order as negative is apparent on the face of the record.

p. 2
02

Whether the appeal was properly on record

Holding

No - the appeal was filed out of time without leave or an extension application, rendering it null and void.

Reasoning

The ruling appealed against was delivered on 28th February 2020 and the Notice of Appeal was filed on 26th May 2020, well beyond the 30 days in Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act. There was no evidence of leave to file out of time nor any pending extension application, so the appeal was not properly admitted and is null and void.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Without a proper Memorandum of Appeal filed within the statutory period, the Court has no jurisdiction over an application for stay pending appeal.
  • A negative order incapable of execution cannot be stayed.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 13th July 2020 by the Respondent/Objector is merited and is upheld
  2. 2.The Appellant's Application dated 10th June 2020 is struck out with costs to the Respondent/Objector
  3. 3.The Memorandum of Appeal is null and void and therefore there is no appeal on record

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 40 rule 2
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 rule 1
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 21 rule 1
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 3A
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 1A
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 1B
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 79G

Cases cited (7)

  • Abraham Lenaulla Lenkeu vs Charles Katekeyo Nkaru
    (2016) eKLR
  • Esther Wanjiru vs Jackline Arege
    (2014) eKLR
  • Mukisa Biscuits Manufacturing Co. Ltd v. West End Distributors
    [1969] EA 696
  • Hassan Ali Joho & Another vs Suleiman Said Shahbal & 2 Others
    Petition No. 10 of 2013, [2014] eKLR
  • J.N. & 5 others v Board of Management St G. School Nairobi & another
    (2017) eKLR
  • James Mbatia Thuo & Ephantus Mwangi vs Kenya Railways Corporation & Attorney General of Kenya
    [2018] eKLR
  • Kaushik Panchamatia & 3 Others vs Prime Bank Limited & Another
    [2020] eKLR
On appeal from
Subordinate Court
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 3A, 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 40 rule 2, Order 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act on appeals from subordinate courts

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "John Mbugua Muiruri v Kenya Commercial Bank Limited [2021] KEELC 3017 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/3017/eng@2021-05-25

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