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 AppealAllowedCivil Appeal No. 20 of 1998

SOCIETE DE TRANSPORTS INTERNATIONAUX AU RWANDA vs H. H. ABDI [1998] KECA 256 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
9 October 1998
JGJ. E. GicheruPhilip Kiptoo TunoiP. K. TunoiGPG. S. Pall
500 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal struck out an appeal record riddled with errors, confirming that appellants alone are responsible for a complete, legible record.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi (Gicheru, Tunoi and Pall, JJ.A.) delivered on 9 October 1998 on an application by the respondent, H. H. Abdi, under rules 80 and 85(1) and (2) of the Court of Appeal Rules to strike out the record of appeal lodged by Societe de Transports Internationaux au Rwanda on 27 February 1998 in Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1998. The application was grounded on three defects: the record did not incorporate the full proceedings of the trial in the High Court (Mbito, J., ruling of 17 February 1993 in H.C. Misc. Civil Application No. 911 of 1991); several pages were typed out of sequence; and many pages were illegible. Counsel for the appellant conceded the mistakes were rampant and obvious but attributed them to a missing court file, contending the record was prepared from proceedings supplied and certified by the superior court. The court held that a complete record is always desirable because missing sentences, paragraphs or words may obscure vital issues, and that many pages here were blurred and illegible, offending rule 13. It rejected the attempt to blame the superior court, holding that preparation of the record of appeal in civil matters lies squarely on the intending appellant. Although sympathetic to the appellant, whose appeal had repeatedly been struck out on technicalities, the court held that injustice would be occasioned by relying on an incomplete record. The application was allowed, the record of appeal was struck out, and the applicant was awarded the costs of the application.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the record of appeal should be struck out for being incomplete, with pages typed out of sequence and many pages illegible
  2. 2.Whether the intending appellant can escape responsibility for a defective record by blaming the superior court or a missing court file

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether an incomplete and illegible record of appeal warrants striking out the appeal

Holding

Yes. The record was incomplete, pages were out of sequence and many were illegible, offending rule 13 of the Court of Appeal Rules; the record of appeal was struck out.

Reasoning

The court held that a complete record is always desirable so the appellate court can consider the matter fully and do justice. Missing sentences, paragraphs or words may obscure vital issues. Here many pages were blurred and illegible, offending rule 13, and injustice would be occasioned if the court relied on an incomplete record, notwithstanding the principle that rules of procedure are not framed to defeat justice.

p. 2
02

Whether the appellant could avoid responsibility for the defective record by attributing it to a missing court file

Holding

No. Preparation of the record of appeal in civil matters lies squarely on the intending appellant, and blame cast on the superior court will not suffice.

Reasoning

Counsel for the respondent conceded the mistakes were rampant and obvious but attributed them to a missing court file, arguing the record was prepared from proceedings supplied and certified by the superior court. The court rejected this, holding that blame on the superior court will not do because the duty of preparing the record rests primarily on the intending appellant.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • The primary responsibility for preparing a complete record of appeal in civil matters rests on the intending appellant, who cannot shift blame to the superior court.
  • A complete record of proceedings is necessary for the appellate court to do justice, and an appeal may be struck out where the record is incomplete or illegible.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application is allowed
  2. 2.The record of appeal lodged in the Court on 27th February, 1998 is struck out
  3. 3.The applicant (respondent) is awarded the costs of the application

The bench

#

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

JG
majority
Philip Kiptoo Tunoi
majority
GP
majority
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
H.C. Misc. Civil Application No. 911 of 1991
Jurisdiction invoked
Rules 80 and 85(1) and (2) of the Court of Appeal Rules

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.

A complete record of the proceedings is always desirable in order to enable the appellate court to consider fully the matter before it and to arrive at the truth and do justice to the parties.
p. 1Importance of a complete record of appeal
Throwing blame on to the superior court will not do since, primarily, the preparation of the record of appeal in civil matters lies squarely on the intending appellant.
p. 1Responsibility for preparing the record of appeal
This application must be allowed. We so order. The record of appeal lodged in this court on 27th February, 1998 is struck out. The applicant shall have the costs of this application.
p. 2Final orders striking out the record of appeal

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (1)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "SOCIETE DE TRANSPORTS INTERNATIONAUX AU RWANDA vs H. H. ABDI [1998] KECA 256 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1998). Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1998. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1998/256/eng@1998-10-09

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