JUDGEMENT
AKAMBA JA.
This ruling arises from a preliminary objection taken by counsel for the plaintiff-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) to the “notice by the respondents of their intention to rely on preliminary objection: rule 16(1) of CI 19” filed on 2 March 2005.
The facts leading to the application before us are that a motion was filed by the defendant-respondents (hereinafter referred to as the respondents) on 2 March 2005 which was fixed for hearing on 22 March 2005. On the said day when counsel for the respondents rose to move his motion, counsel for the appellant interposed with an objection of his own to the hearing of the preliminary objection slated to be moved that day. Given this state of affairs the court decided to hear counsel for the appellant as to why the preliminary objection filed on 2 March 2005 could not be heard or entertained.
Counsel for the appellant contended that rule 16(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 1997 (CI 19) under which the respon…