[2018] KEHC 8374 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 8374 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant's failure to file the judicial review application within the stipulated time was due to circumstances beyond his control, specifically the administrative error of the court registry forwarding the file to Kisii Law Courts and the bereavement of the presiding judge at Homa Bay. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 8374 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Eliab Morris Hanno Bendo Ombogo; Respondent: The Director of Public Prosecutions
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application 35 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Judicial Review Motion
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
DO Ohungo
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Prohibition Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Judicial Review Prohibition Orders

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

Eliab Morris Hanno Bendo Ombogo

Applicant

The Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Judicial Review Motion

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to file a judicial review application for an order of prohibition.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing was occasioned by circumstances beyond the applicant's control.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's failure to file the judicial review application within the stipulated time was due to circumstances beyond his control, specifically the administrative error of the court registry forwarding the file to Kisii Law Courts and the bereavement of the presiding judge at Homa Bay. The court accepted the applicant's explanation as credible and meritorious, and exercised its discretion to grant an extension of time for filing the motion. The overriding consideration was that the applicant should not be penalized for a delay caused by the court's own administrative processes, and justice would be best served by allowing the application to proceed on its merits.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant is granted an extension of time to file the judicial review motion within 7 days from the date of this ruling.