HARBHAJAN SINGH SEMBI vs LAKELAND MOTORS LIMITED & 52 OTHERS [1998] KECA 121 (KLR)

The court adopted the reasoning in its earlier ruling of 15th May 1998 striking out a similar application by Alfred Okuna and 3 others, which held that the notice of appeal was restricted to the decision that Sembi be paid Ksh.4,000,000, that leave under section 75 of the Civil Procedure Act was necessary, and that in its absence no appeal and no stay pending appeal could lie. The applicant's contention that the ruling also covered a review application under Order 44 failed because the learned Judge did not deal with the review application, his orders rendering 'other efforts' futile.

Mr. Kasamani argued that the ruling of 30th April 1998 covered the review application under Order 44, obviating the need for leave to appeal. The court accepted that a review application existed but noted the Judge never dealt with it. Reading the Judge's closing statement that 'These orders render other efforts totally futile and unnecessary', the court understood 'other efforts' to include the Order 44 review, consistent with the view taken in the earlier striking-out application.