Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

keca-1998-00151

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (CORAM: KWACH, TUNOI & OWUOR, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 167 OF 1998 BETWEEN MOMBASA DEVELOPMENT LIMITED ....................... APPLICANT AND 1. CARGILL EAST AFRICA LTD. .................. 1ST RESPONDENT 2. KENYA TRANSIT AND TRADING CO. LTD. 2ND RESPONDENT 3. J. B. MAINA & COMPANY LTD. ................ 3RD RESPONDENT (Application to strike out the Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Mombasa (Justice Mbogholi) dated 30th day of January, 1996 in H.C.C.S. NO. 146 OF 1993) ******************* RULING OF THE COURT By this motion the applicant, the first respondent in the appeal, seeks two orders. First, to strike out the notice of appeal lodged by the appellant on the 1st day of February, 1996 for failure to comply with rules 74 and 76 of the Rules of this Court; and, secondly, to strike out Civil Appeal No. 312 of 1997. This application is not, in earnest, opposed by the appellant. Its counsel, Mr. Wasuna, concedes that the notice of appeal actually contravened the said rules and; moreover, the record of appeal was lodged in this Court out of time and without the requisite leave. The application must therefore succeed. Consequently, the appeal is fatally defective and is incompetent. It is hereby ordered struck out. The costs of this application and of the appeal are awarded to the applicant. Made at Mombasa this 17th day of July, 1998. R. O. KWACH

page 1 of 2

............... JUDGE OF APPEAL P. K. TUNOI ............... JUDGE OF APPEAL E. OWUOR ............... JUDGE OF APPEAL I certify that this is a true copy of the original. DEPUTY REGISTRAR

page 2 of 2

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.