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

Daniel Kahara Wakigo v Salome Wangui Chege & 1 other

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: KIAGE, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 106 OF 2020 BETWEEN DANIEL KAHARA WAKIGO ........................................... APPELLANT AND SALOME WANGUI CHEGE .................................1ST RESPONDENT THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE.......................................2ND RESPONDENT (An appeal from the ruling and order of the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi (Komingoi, J.) dated 11th December, 2019 in E.L.C No. 1 of 2018) ****************** RULING The motion dated 25th September 2020 is brought under Rule 99(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The applicant also cites provisions of Order 24 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The latter rules are of no application to the matter at hand and I shall duly ignore them. The motion seeks to substitute the appellant Daniel Kahara Wakigo who expired on 5th May 2020 as attested to by the Certificate of Death annexed to the supporting affidavit of the applicant Naomi Wairimu Kahara, the appellant’s widow. The motion is not opposed as no replying affidavit has been filed by the respondent. There really is no reason for opposition anyway. The motion having been brought in timely fashion, and being satisfied that the widow Naomi Wairimu Kahara, who holds a limited grant of letters of administration issued to her in Nairobi HCF P&A/E770/2020, is the legal representative of the appellant, I allow the motion with no orders as to costs. Orders accordingly. Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 18th day of December, 2020. P. O. KIAGE ……………………..…………….… JUDGE OF APPEAL I certify that this is a true copy of the original.

page 1 of 2

Signed 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.