[2022] KEELC 1097 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 1097 (KLR)

The court found that although there was a delay in filing the appeal, the delay was not inordinate and was satisfactorily explained by the applicant's illness and late knowledge of the ruling. The court held that the applicant had demonstrated good and sufficient cause for the delay, and that the intended appeal was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELC 1097 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Erick Odhiambo Ong’ondo; Respondent: Aloice Obongo Ongus
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application 001 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, Appeals From Subordinate Courts, Environment and Land Court Jurisdiction
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Appeals From Subordinate Courts Environment and Land Court Jurisdiction

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Erick Odhiambo Ong’ondo

Applicant

Aloice Obongo Ongus

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated good and sufficient cause for failure to file the appeal within the prescribed time.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal is inordinate and prejudicial to the respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the intended appeal raises arguable issues.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although there was a delay in filing the appeal, the delay was not inordinate and was satisfactorily explained by the applicant's illness and late knowledge of the ruling. The court held that the applicant had demonstrated good and sufficient cause for the delay, and that the intended appeal was not frivolous as there were triable issues discernible from the draft memorandum of appeal. The court exercised its discretion in favour of the applicant, guided by statutory provisions and established case law, and granted leave to file the appeal out of time, emphasizing the applicant's right to access justice and fair hearing under the Constitution.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant is granted forty five (45) days from the date of this order to file and serve the respondent with the record of appeal together with the orders herein.
  • Costs of the application to abide the intended appeal.