Mose v Republic [2026] KECA 312 (KLR)
- Citation
- [2026] KECA 312 (KLR)
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Panel
- LK Kimaru
- Case number
- Criminal Application E054 of 2024
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Panel
- LK Kimaru
- Case number
- Criminal Application E054 of 2024
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The applicant gave a satisfactory and uncontested explanation for the delay, namely the late supply of certified proceedings and judgment while he was incarcerated, which was beyond his control. The Court therefore exercised its discretion under Rule 4 to extend time and allow the appeal process to commence out of time.
Court disposition
Application allowed
Orders
- Leave to appeal out of time granted.
- Notice of appeal to be filed and served within fourteen (14) days from the date of the ruling.
02
Material facts
Parties
Daniel Osoro Mose
ApplicantRepublic
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Notice of Appeal Filing Period (days): 14
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Out of Time / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicant had shown sufficient cause to warrant extension of time to appeal out of time.
- 02
Whether the Court of Appeal should exercise its discretion under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules in favour of the applicant.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The delay in filing the appeal was caused by the High Court’s failure to supply certified copies of the proceedings and judgment in time; because he was incarcerated, he could not follow up personally, so the delay was beyond his control and he should be allowed to appeal.
- Respondent
- The respondent did not oppose the application.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Rule 4, Court of Appeal Rules
Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules empowers the Court to extend time for steps required to be taken outside the prescribed period.
- 02
Court of Appeal reasoning in this ruling
Where delay is explained and attributable to circumstances beyond the applicant’s control, the Court may exercise discretion to allow an out-of-time appeal so that the applicant can ventilate the intended appeal.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The applicant gave a satisfactory and uncontested explanation for the delay, namely the late supply of certified proceedings and judgment while he was incarcerated, which was beyond his control. The Court therefore exercised its discretion under Rule 4 to extend time and allow the appeal process to commence out of time.
Court disposition
Application allowed
- Leave to appeal out of time granted.
- Notice of appeal to be filed and served within fourteen (14) days from the date of the ruling.
Source and reliance status
Court of Appeal
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court of Appeal
Judgment
Mose v Republic (Criminal Application E054 of 2024) [2026] KECA 312 (KLR) (19 February 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KECA 312 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Court of Appeal at Kisumu Criminal Application E054 of 2024 LK Kimaru, JA February 19, 2026 Between Daniel Osoro Mose Applicant and Republic Respondent (Being an application for extension of time to appeal out of time from the Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Kisii (R.E. Ougo, J. dated 3rd March, 2020. in HCCR No. 1 of 2019 Criminal Case 1 of 2019 ) Ruling 1.The applicant, Daniel Osoro Mose was convicted and sentenced of the offence of Murder contrary section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. The Judgment was delivered on 3rd March, 2020. The applicant wishes to appeal against the said decision to this Court. He has filed the present application seeking to be granted leave to appeal out of time. The applicant explains the reason for delay in lodging the appeal in time to be failure by the High Court to supply him with certified copies of the proceedings and Judgment in time to enable him file the appeal in time. The applicant being incarcerated, was not able to follow up with the High Court to have the proceedings and Judgment typed in time to enable him exercise his right of appeal to this Court. The respondent is not opposed to the application being granted. 2.Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal
Rules grant this Court jurisdiction to extend time for any steps to be taken outside the period prescribed by the Rules. In the present application, this Court was convinced by the reason given by the applicant for failure to file the appeal in time. The reason was beyond his control. The applicant should be given a chance to ventilate his appeal before this Court. 3.The application has merit. It is hereby allowed. The applicant is granted leave to appeal out of time. The notice of appeal shall be filed and served within fourteen (14) days of today’s date. DATED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY,2026.L. KIMARU.......................JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a true copy of original.DEPUTY REGISTRAR .
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.