[2020] KESC 11 (KLR)

[2020] KESC 11 (KLR)

The Supreme Court unanimously held that it has jurisdiction to grant leave to extend time for filing documents under its Rules. The applicant provided sufficient grounds for the delay, which was occasioned by administrative challenges in obtaining certified court documents from the Court of Appeal. The delay was not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KESC 11 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Ferdinand Ndungu Waititu Babayao; Respondent: Republic
Court
Supreme Court
Court Station
Supreme Court of Kenya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition (Application) 2 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Petition Application / Application for Leave to File Supplementary Record of Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
DK Maraga, MK Ibrahim, SC Wanjala, NS Ndungu, I Lenaola
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Supplementary Record of Appeal, Court Administration
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Supplementary Record of Appeal Court Administration

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ferdinand Ndungu Waititu Babayao

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition Application / Application for Leave to File Supplementary Record of Appeal Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court should grant leave to file a Supplementary Record of Appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the Supplementary Record of Appeal was justified by administrative reasons beyond the applicant's control.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent would suffer prejudice if the application is allowed.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court unanimously held that it has jurisdiction to grant leave to extend time for filing documents under its Rules. The applicant provided sufficient grounds for the delay, which was occasioned by administrative challenges in obtaining certified court documents from the Court of Appeal. The delay was not attributable to the applicant's fault. The respondent did not oppose the application or demonstrate any prejudice that would result from the grant of the orders sought. The application satisfied the established principles for extension of time as set out in prior Supreme Court decisions. Consequently, the application for leave to file the Supplementary Record of Appeal out of...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion application by the Petitioner dated 7th August 2020 and filed on 11th August 2020 is allowed.
  • The Supplementary Record of Appeal dated 30th July 2020 and filed on 5th August 2020 is deemed as duly and properly filed.