[2000] KECA 420 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant did not unduly delay in bringing the application for extension of time, especially considering the need to correct defects in the order and the exclusion of the Christmas vacation period from the computation of time. The respondent did not present any reasonable opposition....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2000] KECA 420 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: East Africa Televisions Network Ltd; Respondent: Communications Commission of Kenya
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application 1 of 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Extension of time granted.
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeal Process, Court of Appeal Rules
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
East Africa Televisions Network Ltd
Applicant
Communications Commission of Kenya
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal and record of appeal out of time.
- 2 Whether the delay in bringing the application was justified and not inordinate.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant did not unduly delay in bringing the application for extension of time, especially considering the need to correct defects in the order and the exclusion of the Christmas vacation period from the computation of time. The respondent did not present any reasonable opposition. Therefore, the court exercised its discretion to grant the extension, allowing the applicant to file and serve the notice of appeal within 10 days and the memorandum and record of appeal within a further 30 days.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Extension of time granted.
Orders
- Time to file and serve a Notice of Appeal extended by 10 days from the date of the ruling.
- A further 30 days granted to lodge and serve the memorandum and record of appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
( CORAM: BOSIRE, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS)
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2000
BETWEEN
EAST AFRICA TELEVISIONS NETWORK LTD............................................APPLICANT
AND
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION OF KENYA ....................................RESPONDENT
(An application for the extension of time to lodge and serve a notice of appeal and lodge the record of appeal out of time against the ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Justice Githinji) dated the 16th day of November 1998
in
Misc Civil Application No 400 of 1998)
*************************
RULING
The applicant East Africa Television Network Limited, has moved this Court under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, for an order extending the time within which to file and serve a fresh notice of appeal, and to lodge and serve a record of appeal, against the decision of the superior court, in its Misc Civil application No 400 of 1998.
The applicant’s Civil Appeal No 24 of 1999, against the aforesaid decision was struck out for being incompetent, on 19th November, 1999, on the grounds, firstly, that the order appealed against was not drawn in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules and, secondly, that the order cited a judge other than the one who made it. As the applicant was still desirous of challenging the superior court decision on appeal, it, on 5th January, 2000, brought the present application. Mr Kimani, for the applicant, who swore the affidavit in support of the application deposes in it that the delay of about five weeks in bringing this application was occasioned by his endeavour to regularize the defects in the order intended to be appealed against, and he prayed that I exercise my unfettered judicial discretion in the applicant’s favour.
It is now well settled that a litigant whose appeal has been struck out may restart the appellate processes by moving this Court for an order extending the time within which to file and serve a notice and record of appeal, provided that the application is brought promptly and there are no factors or circumstances which will work against him to deny him the extension. The applicant in the matter before me cannot be said to have unduly delayed in bringing this application. That is the more so when one considers that it was necessary to correct the defect in the order against which an appeal is intended, and because, as a general rule, the period of the Christmas vacation is excluded from computation of time. Besides, the respondent’s counsel does not seem to have any reasonable grounds for opposing the extension of time sought.
In the result I allow the application and extend the time within which to file and serve a Notice of Appeal by 10 days from the date hereof and a further 30 days within which to lodge and serve the memorandum and record of appeal. Costs of the application to the respondent.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 15th day of June, 2000.
S.E.O. BOSIRE
....................
JUDGE OF APPEA
L I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR