[2013] KECA 430 (KLR)

[2013] KECA 430 (KLR)

The court found that in the absence of a certificate of delay, the time for filing the record of appeal began to run from the date of delivery of judgment. The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay of over twenty-two months in filing the record of appeal. The court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KECA 430 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Cyrus Muriuki Mathangani; Respondent: Rose Wanjiku Mbai
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 207 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
ARM Visram
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Court of Appeal Rules, Discretionary Powers, Delay in Filing
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Process Court of Appeal Rules Discretionary Powers Delay in Filing

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cyrus Muriuki Mathangani

Applicant

Rose Wanjiku Mbai

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 has provided sufficient reason for the inordinate delay in filing the record of appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the absence of a certificate of delay precludes the applicant from benefiting from an extension of time under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to extend time in the circumstances of this case.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that in the absence of a certificate of delay, the time for filing the record of appeal began to run from the date of delivery of judgment. The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay of over twenty-two months in filing the record of appeal. The court emphasized that the discretion to extend time must be exercised judiciously, considering the length and reason for the delay, the prospects of success of the intended appeal, and the prejudice to the respondent. The applicant did not exhibit a draft memorandum of appeal or outline the grounds of appeal, making it impossible for the court to assess the chances of success. Consequently,...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for extension of time to file the notice and record of appeal out of time is disallowed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.