Epetait v Ismat (Election Petition Appeal No. 12 11)
The full judgment
Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
Acting under Rule 36 of the Court of Appeal Rules, which permits correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes arising from accidental slip or omission, the court found that it had omitted to award a certificate for two counsel that had been prayed for during submissions. Since the appellant was represented by two counsel and the respondent had not objected to the request, the court granted the request and amended its judgment accordingly to give effect to the court's intention at the time judgment was given.
Facts
The appellant, Epetait Francis, had appealed against a High Court judgment in an election petition. The appellant was represented by two counsel. During submissions, a certificate for two counsel had been prayed for, but the Court of Appeal's judgment omitted to address this request. On 9 August 2012, the Registrar received a letter from M/S Sam Njuba, counsel for the appellant, drawing attention to this omission. The letter was copied to counsel for the respondent, who raised no objection. The court considered the request under Rule 36 of its rules.
Issues
- Whether the court should amend its judgment to award a certificate for two counsel under the slip rule where it had omitted to do so.
Orders
- The request for a certificate for two counsel is granted.
- The judgment is amended accordingly.