[2021] KECA 492 (KLR)

[2021] KECA 492 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants provided a satisfactory and plausible explanation for the delay in filing the Notice of Appeal, primarily due to the disruption of court operations following the Covid-19 pandemic and the resultant lack of communication regarding the judgment date. The delay was not inordinate,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KECA 492 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: David Mahugu Thondu; Applicant: King David Fast Food Limited; Applicant: Lizards Entertainment Limited; Respondent: Kenya Urban Road Authority
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application E293 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed. Extension of time granted.
Judges
AK Murgor
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Court Discretion, Covid 19 Impact
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeal Procedure Court Discretion Covid 19 Impact

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 1 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Mahugu Thondu

Applicant

King David Fast Food Limited

Applicant

Lizards Entertainment Limited

Applicant

Kenya Urban Road Authority

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 applicants have provided sufficient cause for the delay in filing the Notice of Appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to extend time for filing the Notice of Appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent would suffer prejudice if the extension is granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants provided a satisfactory and plausible explanation for the delay in filing the Notice of Appeal, primarily due to the disruption of court operations following the Covid-19 pandemic and the resultant lack of communication regarding the judgment date. The delay was not inordinate, and there was no evidence that the respondent would suffer prejudice if the extension was granted. The court was satisfied that the applicants had demonstrated sufficient cause and exercised its discretion to grant the extension of time sought.

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Extension of time granted.

Orders

  • Extension of time to file and serve the Notice of Appeal granted; extension lapses seven days from the date of this ruling.
  • The Memorandum and record of appeal to be lodged in accordance with rule 82 of the Court of Appeal Rules.