In this matter the respondent Republic invited the Court to
strike out the appeal, notice of which was instituted by the Appellants on two
grounds, namely, that the notice of appeal contravened rule 61(5) in that it
did not contain a statement therein that the Appellants intended or did not
intend to appear at the hearing of the appeal. Moreover, the notice of appeal
also offended rule 61(6) as the learned Advocate who signed it on behalf of the
Appellants did not indicate whether he was retained only to prepare the notice
of appeal or retained to appear at the hearing of the appeal or assigned to do
the same, as the case may be.
The Court considered the grounds raised for striking the
notice of appeal.