Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealOtherCivil Appeal (Application) No. 35 of 2017· [2018] KECA 138 (KLR)

Total Kenya Limited v Reuben Mulwa Kioko

Court of Appeal of Kenya
15 November 2018
1,539 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Court of Appeal struck out a late attempt to kill an appeal because it missed a strict 30-day filing deadline.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Court of Appeal at Malindi (Visram, Karanja and Koome, JJ.A) on a notice of motion by the respondent, Reuben Mulwa Kioko, under Rule 84 of the Court of Appeal Rules seeking to strike out the Notice of Appeal (filed 7th April 2017) and Record of Appeal (filed 7th June 2017) lodged by Total Kenya Limited against a ruling of the High Court at Malindi (Chitembwe, J.) dated 27th March 2017 in H.C.C.C. No. 27 of 2016. The respondent advanced three grounds: non-service of the Notice of Appeal, service of the Record of Appeal more than five months after filing and outside the time prescribed by Rule 90(1), and omission of the certified order from the record, citing Bwana Mohamed Bwana. The appellant conceded late service, attributing it to an inadvertent error by its advocate's clerk, relied on Salat to urge the court to overlook a procedural lapse occasioning no prejudice, and contended in limine that the application was incompetent because it was filed outside the 30-day period in the proviso to Rule 84. The court resolved the threshold issue: service of the record on 15th November 2017 started the 30-day clock, which, extended for the Jamuhuri Day holiday, expired on 18th December 2017; the application filed on 29th December 2017 was therefore out of time and incompetent. The court struck out the application itself, leaving the Notice and Record of Appeal intact, and made no orders as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Competency of the Rule 84 striking-out application filed outside the 30-day window

Holding

The application, filed on 29th December 2017 after service of the Record of Appeal on 15th November 2017, fell outside the 30-day period (adjusted for the Jamuhuri Day holiday) and was incompetent; it was struck out.

Reasoning

Rule 84 permits a person affected by an appeal to apply to strike out a notice or record of appeal, but its proviso bars any such application brought after thirty days from service of the notice or record. Service of the record on 15th November 2017 was not in dispute, so the deadline, extended for the Jamuhuri Day public holiday, expired on 18th December 2017. Filing on 29th December 2017 was out of time. Precedent of this Court confirms the proviso is mandatory and non-compliance is fatal.

p. 2
02

Whether the Notice and Record of Appeal should be struck out for late service and omission of the certified order

Holding

The court did not reach the merits of the respondent's striking-out grounds because the application itself was incompetent; the Notice and Record of Appeal were not struck out.

Reasoning

The respondent argued under Rule 77(1) that the Notice of Appeal was never served, under Rule 90(1) that the record was served over five months late, and under Rule 87(h) that the certified order was omitted, relying on Bwana Mohamed Bwana. The appellant conceded late service but invoked Salat, urging the court to overlook an inadvertent error causing no prejudice. Because the application was out of time under the Rule 84 proviso, the court disposed of it on that threshold ground without determining these grounds.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An application to strike out a notice of appeal or an appeal under Rule 84 must be brought within thirty days of service of the notice of appeal or record of appeal, and failure to comply renders the application incompetent and liable to be struck out.
  • The time for computing the thirty-day period under the proviso to Rule 84 excludes public holidays, and the proviso is mandatory.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated and filed in the Court on 29th December, 2017 is struck out
  2. 2.No orders as to costs
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Malindi
H.C.C.C. No. 27 of 2016
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 84 of the Court of Appeal Rules (application to strike out a notice or record of appeal)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Total Kenya Limited v Reuben Mulwa Kioko", Case Analysis (2018). Civil Appeal (Application) No. 35 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2018/138/eng@2018-11-15

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