[2021] KECA 75 (KLR)

[2021] KECA 75 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay of 789 days in seeking extension of time to file a notice of appeal. The reasons advanced, including pursuing the matter in the wrong courts and only later realizing the correct forum, were deemed insufficient to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KECA 75 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joshua Alumasi Aboyi; Respondent: Alfred Ivusa Laban; Respondent: Savala Secondary School
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application E35 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application struck out
Judges
JW Lessit
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Notice of Appeal, Procedural Irregularities
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Notice of Appeal Procedural Irregularities

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joshua Alumasi Aboyi

Applicant

Alfred Ivusa Laban

Respondent

Savala Secondary School

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient reason for the inordinate delay of 789 days in seeking extension of time to file a notice of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the application, having been brought under the wrong provisions of the law, properly invokes the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay of 789 days in seeking extension of time to file a notice of appeal. The reasons advanced, including pursuing the matter in the wrong courts and only later realizing the correct forum, were deemed insufficient to justify such a lengthy delay. Furthermore, the application was brought under the wrong provisions of the law, failing to properly invoke the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to strike out the application, finding no merit in the reasons advanced for the delay or in the procedural approach taken by the applicant.

Court Disposition

application struck out

Orders

  • The application for extension of time to file notice of appeal is struck out.
  • No order as to costs.