[2001] KECA 175 (KLR)

[2001] KECA 175 (KLR)

The court found that the period between the striking out of the previous appeal and the filing of the present application for extension of time was not inordinate. There was no delay to explain for the period during which the previous appeal was pending. The applicant was therefore entitled to the exercise of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] KECA 175 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Crescent Construction Co. Ltd.; Respondent: Delphis Bank Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 54 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Exercise of Discretion
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Process Exercise of Discretion

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crescent Construction Co. Ltd.

Applicant

Delphis Bank Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to file a notice and record of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the period between the striking out of the previous appeal and the filing of the current application constitutes inexcusable delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the period between the striking out of the previous appeal and the filing of the present application for extension of time was not inordinate. There was no delay to explain for the period during which the previous appeal was pending. The applicant was therefore entitled to the exercise of the court's discretion in its favour to allow the extension of time, thereby enabling the applicant to pursue its right of appeal. The court emphasized that the right of appeal should not be denied where there is no culpable delay or prejudice to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant must lodge its notice of appeal and serve the same on the respondent within seven days of the date hereof.
  • The record of appeal must be lodged within fourteen days from the date the notice of appeal is lodged in court.