[2018] KEHC 5517 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 5517 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal. The explanation provided, namely waiting for typed proceedings and judgment, was unconvincing because the application for proceedings was made in 2016 and no further steps were taken for a significant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 5517 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: David Nyabuto Amboga; Applicant: Paskalia Moraa Amboga; Respondent: Gusii Mwalimu Savings and Credit Co-operative Society Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisii
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application 20 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
DAS Majanja
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Out of Time, Sufficient Cause, Delay in Filing, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeal Out of Time Sufficient Cause Delay in Filing Costs Award

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Nyabuto Amboga

Applicant

Paskalia Moraa Amboga

Applicant

Gusii Mwalimu Savings and Credit Co-operative Society Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have shown sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal is inordinate and prejudicial to the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal. The explanation provided, namely waiting for typed proceedings and judgment, was unconvincing because the application for proceedings was made in 2016 and no further steps were taken for a significant period. The delay of over two and a half years was deemed inordinate, and the court held that reviving the matter would prejudice the respondent. Consequently, the application for extension of time was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for extension of time to file appeal out of time is dismissed.
  • The applicants shall pay costs assessed at Kshs. 5000 to the respondent.