The oldest of three brothers has been ordered to stop filing multiple appeals in the Naivas Supermarket fight by appealing against a single ruling from High Court Judge Grace Nzioka. The Justice Committee for Civil Law gave this order about two weeks ago, after noting how he was abusing court proceedings and wasting resources with frivolous applications raising identical arguments as before; however Mukuha continues pursuing it further through various legal channels which could result eventually lead him down an expensive path if nothing changes soon.
Kagira is appealing his brothers’ decisions to dismiss three of Kagir’s applications. He wants them stopped from transferring or dealing with shares and property left behind by their late father, Naivas Jewellers owner Simon Mukuha who died last year in November 2016 after a long illness
In total 21 people apply for leave but only 10 are granted because there isn’t enough space available on the bench which led him/her file an appeal against this decision since it went against them personally as well functionally speaking
The appellate court judges have sided with Kagira in their ruling delivered on December 17th, 2017. They said nothing was adduced before the Court to demonstrate that Judge Nzioka failed take into account relevant factors when she dismissed his cases; instead they found it improper and irregular how he included Naivas Ltd as an additional party later through an amended document filed 3 September 2014 without permission from either side or any mention during initial proceedings between October 2013 – March 2015
The inclusion of this new factor led them toward reaching opposite conclusion than what would’ve otherwise occurred if all
“It follows therefore that no injunctive orders could be issued by the High court against Naivas Ltd as it was not properly a party to the High Court proceedings. Justice Nzioka considered the laid down principles when she came to her determination. In our view, it has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of this court that either the Judge exercised her discretion wrongly or took into account irrelevant factors, or failed to take into account relevant factors. This appeal fails,” they said.