[2024] KECA 955 (KLR)

[2024] KECA 955 (KLR)

The Court held that while the application was not ambiguous, it was omnibus in nature, combining prayers for leave to appeal and extension of time. Under Rule 53 of the Court of Appeal Rules, a single judge lacks jurisdiction to determine an application for leave to appeal, which must be heard by a full bench....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KECA 955 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited; Applicant: Joseph M Gikonyo t/a Garam Investments; Respondent: Kenya Farmers Association Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application E047 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Single Judge Ruling on Application for Leave and Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
Application referred to a full bench for determination of the prayer for leave to appeal.
Judges
JW Lessit
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Extension of Time, Court Jurisdiction, Omnibus Applications
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Extension of Time Court Jurisdiction Omnibus Applications

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited

Applicant

Joseph M Gikonyo t/a Garam Investments

Applicant

Kenya Farmers Association Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Single Judge Ruling on Application for Leave and Extension of Time to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to leave to appeal against the ruling of the Environment and Land Court.
  2. 2 Whether the Court has jurisdiction to grant extension of time to file the record of appeal before leave to appeal is granted.
  3. 3 Whether an omnibus application seeking both leave to appeal and extension of time is procedurally proper.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that while the application was not ambiguous, it was omnibus in nature, combining prayers for leave to appeal and extension of time. Under Rule 53 of the Court of Appeal Rules, a single judge lacks jurisdiction to determine an application for leave to appeal, which must be heard by a full bench. Furthermore, the prayer for extension of time to file the record of appeal is premature because there is no appeal before the Court until leave is granted. Rather than striking out the application on technical grounds, the Court exercised its discretion in line with Article 159(2) of the Constitution to avoid undue technicalities and directed that the application be placed before a...

Court Disposition

Application referred to a full bench for determination of the prayer for leave to appeal.

Orders

  • The application is to be placed before a full bench of the Court of Appeal for determination of the prayer for leave to appeal the decision of the superior court.