WANJE V. A.K. SAIKWA

RULING

HANCOX JA

This application under rule 29(1) to admit or to direct the admission of evidence additional to that which was adduced before the High Court was made at the eleventh hour as the appeal was called on for hearing. Leave was only given to bring the application at that stage because a new advocate, Mr Mburu, had just been handed the brief (Messrs MM Kupalia and Co of Malindi having acted for the ninety-four appellants, and former defendants, from the inception of the proceedings in the High Court), and stated from the Bar that it was his opinion that “very many” matters of fact had been omitted by the witnesses before the court of trial. Mr Mburu added that his case on the appeal would be “quite spurious” without these facts. He stated with engaging frankness that he was unable to advance any good reason as to why the evidence proposed had not been adduced at the trial, as there was ample opportunity to do so, a matter emphasized by Mr Kamere in his submissions on behalf o…