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 AppealStruck OutCivil Appeal (Appli) 259 of 1997

GEORGE ROINE TITUS & another v JOHN P. NANGURAI [1998] KECA 43 (KLR)

Court of Appeal
22 October 1998
JGJ. E. GicheruGPG. S. PallEOE. Owuor
144 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

#

The Court of Appeal struck out the appellants' appeal after their own lawyer conceded the strike-out application, leaving the High Court judgment intact.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a very short order of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi dated 22nd October 1998, delivered by a bench of Gicheru, Pall and Owuor, Judges of Appeal. The appeal, Civil Appeal (Appli) 259 of 1997, was brought by George Roine Titus and Daniel Ndichu against John P. Nangurai, suing as personal representative of the late Harry Lewis Nangurai. The appeal lay from the decree and judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Bosire J) dated 20th October 1996 in H.C.C.C No. 1038 of 1974. The respondent had applied to strike out the appeal. At the hearing, Mr. Machira, appearing for the appellants, conceded the respondent's application. In consequence, the Court struck out the appeal and awarded the costs of both the application and the appeal to the respondent. The order contains no reasoning, no framed issues, no discussion of authority, and no separate opinions; it is a single order of the whole court. It therefore sets no binding precedent beyond its disposal of the appeal, and the underlying High Court judgment of 20th October 1996 stands undisturbed. The document is certified by the Deputy Registrar as a true copy of the original.

Key legal issues

#

Legal principles established

#

    Court orders

    #
    1. 1.The appellants' appeal is struck out
    2. 2.Costs of the application and of the appeal are awarded to the respondent

    The bench

    #

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

    JG
    majority
    GP
    majority
    EO
    majority
    On appeal from
    High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
    H.C.C.C No. 1038 of 1974
    Jurisdiction invoked
    Appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over the Decree/Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi dated 20th October, 1996

    Relief refused

    #

    The appellants' appeal against the High Court judgment

    Counsel for the appellants conceded the respondent's application to strike out the appeal

    p. 1

    Costs

    The said appeal is struck out with costs of the application and the appeal to the respondent.

    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.

    In the result, the said appeal is struck out with costs of the application and the appeal to the respondent.
    p. 1Final orders - appeal struck out on concession with costs to the respondent

    Issues in the judgment

    #
    minor

    The judgment is a brief consent/strike-out order; it records a concession by counsel for the appellants but contains no reasons, issues for determination, or holdings, and the party described as conceding is referred to as 'Mr. Machira' while the order text refers to 'the respondents' appeal' though the striking-out is of the appellants' appeal.

    Key timeline

    #

    Practical implications

    #

    Frequently asked questions

    #

    Cite this brief

    #

    Cite this brief

    Caselaw, "GEORGE ROINE TITUS & another v JOHN P. NANGURAI [1998] KECA 43 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1998). Civil Appeal (Appli) 259 of 1997. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1998/43/eng@1998-10-22

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