[1998] KECA 145 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal found that the inordinate delay of nearly 15 months in delivering judgment by the trial judge, without any compelling reasons being provided, undermined the integrity of the judicial process. The delay led to a loss of the 'feel' of the case by the judge and raised legitimate suspicion that a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1998] KECA 145 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Elizabeth Braganza; Respondent: Tysons Habenga Limited
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 285 of 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal_allowed
- Legal Topics
- Judgment Delay, Miscarriage of Justice, Judicial Conduct
- 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
Elizabeth Braganza
Appellant
Tysons Habenga Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the inordinate delay in delivery of judgment by the trial judge constituted a miscarriage of justice.
- 2 Whether the findings of the trial judge were justified by the evidence on record given the delay.
- 3 Whether the conduct of the trial judge in delaying judgment affected the substance of the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal found that the inordinate delay of nearly 15 months in delivering judgment by the trial judge, without any compelling reasons being provided, undermined the integrity of the judicial process. The delay led to a loss of the 'feel' of the case by the judge and raised legitimate suspicion that a miscarriage of justice had occurred, as submissions may have been forgotten or lost. The conduct of the judge in delaying the judgment, combined with the persuasive submissions of the appellant's counsel, materially affected the substance of the appeal and justified reversal of the High Court's decision.
Court Disposition
appeal_allowed
Orders
- The appeal is allowed.
- Reliefs as suggested in Shah, J.A.'s judgment are granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
(CORAM: AKIWUMI, TUNOI & SHAH, JJ.A.)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 285 OF 1997
BETWEEN
ELIZABETH BRAGANZA .................................. APPELLANT
AND
TYSONS HABENGA LIMITED ..............................RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT OF TUNOI, J.A.
(Appeal from a Judgment of the High Court at Nairobi (the Honourable Justice Lady Owuor) given on 16th day of
October, 1997
in
H.C.C.C. NO. 105 OF 1991)
*******************
I have had the advantage of reading the judgment of Shah,J.A. with which I agree.
I add my views only on the way the learned Judgeconducted this case. Mr. Goswami, counsel for the appellant,
invited our attention to the fact that the learned Judge tooknearly 15 months to deliver the judgment and delivered the
same only after some more than 30 vain attendances by theappellant's advocates. He submitted that this long delay
resulted in the learned Judge making material findings whichwere not justified by the evidence on record.
Delay in delivering judgment may arise due to a varietyof reasons but is solely the responsibility of the judge whoheard the case. What constitutes delay, however, depends onthe particular circumstances of each case.
In this case the delay was too inordinate and should nothave occurred unless there were compelling reasons which thelearned Judge should have explained in the judgment. Nodoubt, by the time she wrote her judgment, human as she is,the learned Judge lacked the "feel" of the case. Also, thelength of time between hearing the case and writing ofjudgment gave rise to suspicion that a miscarriage of justicead occurred through submissions being forgotten or lost.
Again, it has been suggested that due to incessantcomplaints over the delay by the appellant's counsel thejudgment was vindictive. It cannot be gainsaid that thisconduct of the learned Judge in delaying the delivery of herjudgment added great weight to the substance of the appeal,and together with the forceful and persuasive submissionsofthecounsel for the appellant, resulted in the reversal ofjudgment in the appeal.
For these reasons and the reasons given in Shah, J.A.'sjudgment, I would allow this appeal and grant the reliefssuggested by Shah, J.A.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 20th day of March,1998.
P. K. TUNOI
...............
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR