Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealOtherCivil Appeal 67 of 1997

GEOFFREY KIHUNYU WANJURA v GICHINI KIGUTA & another [1998] KECA 38 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
22 September 1998
RKR. O. KwachGPG. S. PallEOE. Owuor
130 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal postponed this land dispute appeal indefinitely because the appellant's lawyer was abroad — no decision was made on the merits.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This document is not a substantive appellate judgment but a brief procedural order of the Court of Appeal at Nakuru dated 22 September 1998, made by Kwach, Pall and Owuor, JJA. The appeal by Geoffrey Kihunyu Wanjura against Gichini Kiguta and Mutirithia Farmers Co. Ltd, arising from a High Court judgment of Rimita, J. dated 21 September 1994 in H.C.C.C. No. 67 of 1997, had been listed for hearing. Counsel for the appellant, Mr. Mirugi Kariuki, was away from the country but had communicated with the Court by fax. On that basis the Court removed the appeal from the day's hearing list and stood it over generally. No issues of law or fact were determined, no decision of the High Court was affirmed, reversed or varied, and no costs order was made. The document contains no ratio decidendi and creates no binding precedent; it is recorded here solely to document the procedural history of the appeal. Note also an apparent clerical inconsistency: the High Court case number is printed as 67 of 1997, the same number as the appeal, and the High Court judgment date (1994) precedes the appeal's year of institution (1997).

Key legal issues

#

Legal principles established

#

    Court orders

    #
    1. 1.This appeal is hereby taken out of today's hearing list and stood over generally.

    The bench

    #

    One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

    RK
    majority

    Wrote the judgment

    GP
    majority
    EO
    majority
    On appeal from
    High Court of Kenya at Nakuru
    H.C.C.C. No. 67 of 1997
    Jurisdiction invoked
    Appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over the High Court (appeal from H.C.C.C. No. 67 of 1997); no specific constitutional or statutory provision is cited in the document.

    Quotable passages

    #

    Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.

    This appeal is hereby taken out of today's hearing list and stood over generally.
    p. 1Adjournment order

    Issues in the judgment

    #
    material

    The document is not a substantive judgment but a procedural adjournment order; no issues are determined, no holdings are available, and no costs order is made.

    minor

    The appeal number and the High Court case number are identical (67 of 1997), which is internally inconsistent on the face of the document.

    minor

    The document is signed by a single judge (R.O. Kwach) although the coram lists three judges of appeal.

    Key timeline

    #

    Practical implications

    #

    Frequently asked questions

    #

    Cite this brief

    #

    Cite this brief

    Caselaw, "GEOFFREY KIHUNYU WANJURA v GICHINI KIGUTA & another [1998] KECA 38 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1998). Civil Appeal 67 of 1997. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1998/38/eng@1998-09-22

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