[2018] KECA 30 (KLR)

[2018] KECA 30 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had promptly filed the notice of appeal and made timely requests for certified copies of proceedings and judgment. The delay in filing the record of appeal was substantially caused by the court's delay in providing the necessary documents, as evidenced by unchallenged...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KECA 30 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Edward Kimiti Kahiu; Respondent: Henry Njoroge Kamau
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 129 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed. Extension of time granted.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Adverse Possession, Appeal Procedure, Delay in Proceedings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Adverse Possession Appeal Procedure Delay in Proceedings

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

Edward Kimiti Kahiu

Applicant

Henry Njoroge Kamau

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established sufficient cause for extension of time to file and serve the record of appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal was excusable given the circumstances, particularly the delay in obtaining certified copies of proceedings and judgment.
  3. 3 Whether granting the extension would prejudice the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had promptly filed the notice of appeal and made timely requests for certified copies of proceedings and judgment. The delay in filing the record of appeal was substantially caused by the court's delay in providing the necessary documents, as evidenced by unchallenged correspondence and reminders. The respondent did not contest the applicant's account of the delay, nor did the court find the intended appeal to be frivolous. Considering the discretionary factors, including the absence of prejudice to the respondent and the arguable nature of the intended appeal, the court exercised its discretion to grant the extension of time sought by the applicant.

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Extension of time granted.

Orders

  • The applicant shall file and serve his memorandum of appeal and record of appeal within 45 days from the date of delivery of this ruling.
  • The costs of this application shall abide the outcome of the intended appeal.