[1997] KECA 198 (KLR)

[1997] KECA 198 (KLR)

The court found that the notice of appeal lodged on 8th October, 1996 was validly and properly filed within the prescribed time. The subsequent notice of appeal dated 16th October, 1996 and filed on 23rd October, 1996 was out of time and could not be deemed as properly filed. The applicant failed to provide an...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1997] KECA 198 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: The Official Receiver & Interim Liquidator, Continental Credit Finance Limited; Respondent: Deto Investment Company Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 104 of 1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve Notice of Appeal
Outcome
Application partly allowed.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Notice of Appeal, Appellate Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Notice of Appeal Appellate Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Official Receiver & Interim Liquidator, Continental Credit Finance Limited

Applicant

Deto Investment Company Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the notice of appeal dated 16th October, 1996 and filed on 23rd October, 1996 can be deemed as properly filed.
  3. 3 Whether the earlier notice of appeal lodged on 8th October, 1996 was valid.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the notice of appeal lodged on 8th October, 1996 was validly and properly filed within the prescribed time. The subsequent notice of appeal dated 16th October, 1996 and filed on 23rd October, 1996 was out of time and could not be deemed as properly filed. The applicant failed to provide an explanation for filing a second notice. Exercising judicial discretion under rule 4, the court extended the time for filing and serving the record of appeal by a further 30 days from the date of the ruling, but made no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

Application partly allowed.

Orders

  • Time for filing and serving the record of appeal is extended by 30 days from the date of this ruling.
  • No order as to costs.