Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | civil appl no nai. 240 of 02 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | Samuel Ayienda Mokua v Tinga Trading Co. Ltd |
| Date Delivered: | 28 Nov 2002 |
| Case Class: | Civil |
| Court: | Court of Appeal at Kisumu |
| Case Action: | Ruling |
| Judge(s): | Riaga Samuel Cornelius Omolo, Amrittal Bhagwanji Shah, Emmanuel Okello O'Kubasu |
| Citation: | Samuel Ayienda Mokua v Tinga Trading Co. Ltd [2002] eKLR |
| Case History: | (An application for a stay of execution in an intended appeal from a Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at at Kisii (Mr. Justice Wambilyangah) dated 20th March, 2002 in H.C.C.C. NO. 98 OF 2000) |
| Court Division: | Civil |
| Parties Profile: | Individual v Corporation |
| County: | Kisumu |
| History Docket No: | H.C.C.C. NO. 98 OF 2000 |
| History Judges: | Isaac Charles Cheskaki Wambilyangah |
| History County: | Kisii |
| Case Outcome: | Application dismissed. |
| Disclaimer: | The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information |
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT KISUMU
CORAM: OMOLO, SHAH & O'KUBASU, JJ.A.
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 240 OF 2002
BETWEEN
SAMUEL AYIENDA MOKUA ................................APPLICANT
AND
TINGA TRADING CO. LTD .................................RESPONDENT
(An application for a stay of execution in an intended appeal from a Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at at Kisii (Mr. Justice Wambilyangah) dated 20th March, 2002
in
H.C.C.C. NO. 98 OF 2000)
*********
RULING OF THE COURT
The applicant, Samuel Ayienda Mokua , was represented by an advocate in the superior court.
A consent order was recorded in the superior court.
Advocate for the respondent was also there. We are not told what was wrong with the consent order recorded. There is nothing on record here to show that factor, if any. Mr. Sagwe who now appears for the applicant states from the Bar that in regard to the matter before the superior court, that Court had no jurisdiction. As pointed out there is nothing on record before us to establish that point. Mr. Sagwe also says that the advocate had no express authority to do what he did.
Advocates properly on record have implied authority to bind their clients. We see nothing arguable in the intended appeal. This application is therefore dismissed with costs.
Dated and delivered at Kisumu this 28th day of November, 2002.
R.S.C. OMOLO
..................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A. B. SHAH
.................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
E. O'KUBASU
.................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
Please Wait. Searching ...