[2024] KECA 435 (KLR)

[2024] KECA 435 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants had explained the delay in filing and serving the record of appeal as being due to the lower court registry's delay in providing certified typed proceedings. More importantly, the parties had entered into a consent, dated 20th November 2023, agreeing to compromise the application...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KECA 435 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Buxton Point Apartments Ltd; Applicant: Hon Suleiman Shabal; Applicant: Roton Construction Co Ltd; Respondent: Abdullah Ahmed Gele t/a Buxton Filling Station; Respondent: Chief Officer, Land, housing & Physical Planning County Government of Mombasa; Respondent: County Government of Mombasa; Respondent: The Chief Land Registrar
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal (Application) E085 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Application / Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve Record of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed by consent; record of appeal deemed properly filed and served; no order as to costs
Judges
AK Murgor
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Record of Appeal Filing, Contempt of Court Orders, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Record of Appeal Filing Contempt of Court Orders Appeal Procedure

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Buxton Point Apartments Ltd

Applicant

Hon Suleiman Shabal

Applicant

Roton Construction Co Ltd

Applicant

Abdullah Ahmed Gele t/a Buxton Filling Station

Respondent

Chief Officer, Land, housing & Physical Planning County Government of Mombasa

Respondent

County Government of Mombasa

Respondent

The Chief Land Registrar

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Application / Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve Record of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have provided sufficient cause for the extension of time to file and serve the record of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing and serving the record of appeal was justified under the circumstances.
  3. 3 Whether the consent of the parties to compromise the application is valid and binding.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had explained the delay in filing and serving the record of appeal as being due to the lower court registry's delay in providing certified typed proceedings. More importantly, the parties had entered into a consent, dated 20th November 2023, agreeing to compromise the application for extension of time. The court accepted the consent as binding and allowed the application, deeming the record of appeal as properly filed and served. The court exercised its discretion in favour of the applicants, noting the absence of prejudice to the respondents and the parties' mutual agreement. No order as to costs was made.

Court Disposition

application allowed by consent; record of appeal deemed properly filed and served; no order as to costs

Orders

  • The application for extension of time is allowed.
  • The record of appeal dated 13th September 2023 and filed on 15th September 2023 is deemed as properly filed and served on all parties.