[2019] KEHC 199 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 199 (KLR)

The court held that the delay in filing the appeal, occasioned by a misapprehension of the requirements for change of advocates under Order 9 Rule 9, was not inordinate and did not prejudice the respondents. The court found that the appellant's right to access the court and be heard on appeal outweighed the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 199 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Burhani Paints & Hardware; Respondent: Mohamed Iqbal Abdulaziz; Respondent: Mohamed Kassim Abdulaziz; Respondent: Mohamed Ebrahim Abdulaziz
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 227 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for extension of time and stay pending appeal allowed with conditions.
Judges
CA Otieno
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Stay Pending Appeal, Change of Advocate, Order 9 Rule 9, Delay in Filing, Decretal Sum Deposit
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Stay Pending Appeal Change of Advocate Order 9 Rule 9 Delay in Filing Decretal Sum Deposit

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Burhani Paints & Hardware

Appellant

Mohamed Iqbal Abdulaziz

Respondent

Mohamed Kassim Abdulaziz

Respondent

Mohamed Ebrahim Abdulaziz

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the delay in filing the appeal due to change of advocates justifies extension of time.
  2. 2 Whether stay of execution pending appeal should be granted despite lack of proof of substantial loss.
  3. 3 Whether Order 9 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules requires leave for an advocate to come on record for purposes of filing an appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the delay in filing the appeal, occasioned by a misapprehension of the requirements for change of advocates under Order 9 Rule 9, was not inordinate and did not prejudice the respondents. The court found that the appellant's right to access the court and be heard on appeal outweighed the procedural misstep. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to extend time for filing the appeal and deemed the Memorandum of Appeal as duly filed. On the issue of stay pending appeal, the court granted a conditional stay, requiring the appellant to deposit the full decretal sum in a joint interest-bearing account within 30 days, noting that this would secure the respondents'...

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time and stay pending appeal allowed with conditions.

Orders

  • Leave granted to file appeal out of time; Memorandum of Appeal dated and filed on 14/11/2019 deemed duly filed.
  • Stay of execution granted on condition that the full decretal sum of Kshs.2,760,472.73 (excluding costs) is deposited in a joint interest-bearing account within 30 days.