Tongo Francis v Iddi Shaban (Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2020)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
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
The High Court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 43 Rule 31 of the Civil Procedure Rules where the appellant failed to comply with court directions to prepare and file the record of appeal and written submissions despite being given specific deadlines.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Facts
The appellant lodged an appeal on 6 January 2020. The matter came up for mention before the Assistant Registrar on 11 September 2024. Counsel for the appellant was present but the respondent was unrepresented and absent. The court informed the appellant that the lower court record was available and gave directions for prosecution of the appeal. The appellant was directed to prepare the record of appeal and serve it on the respondent by 11 October 2024, file written submissions by 11 November 2024, with the respondent to respond by 10 December 2024 and rejoinder by 12 December 2024. Neither party complied with these directions. The court record contained no record of appeal and no submissions from either party.
Issues
- Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution where the appellant failed to comply with court directions to file the record of appeal and written submissions.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.
- No order as to costs.
Legislation cited (2)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.