[2024] KEHC 9037 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 9037 (KLR)

The court found that although there was a significant delay in the prosecution of the appeal, the delay was not attributable to the appellant but rather to the administrative processes of the court, specifically the failure of the lower court to forward the original file to the High Court in a timely manner. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 9037 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Gee Tee Sons Limited; Respondent: Emma Njambi Karungo
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Thika
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal E352 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Appeal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
BM Musyoki
Legal Topics
Appeal Delay, Striking Out Appeal, Inherent Jurisdiction, Admission of Appeal
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Appeal Delay Striking Out Appeal Inherent Jurisdiction Admission of Appeal

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gee Tee Sons Limited

Appellant

Emma Njambi Karungo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Appeal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the memorandum of appeal should be struck out for want of prosecution due to delay by the appellant.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in prosecuting the appeal is attributable to the appellant or to the court's administrative processes.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although there was a significant delay in the prosecution of the appeal, the delay was not attributable to the appellant but rather to the administrative processes of the court, specifically the failure of the lower court to forward the original file to the High Court in a timely manner. The appellant had taken reasonable steps to progress the appeal, including requesting the file and seeking directions, but could not control the pace of the court's administrative actions. The court held that it would be unjust to penalize the appellant for delays outside its control, and therefore dismissed the application to strike out the appeal for want of prosecution. The court...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The notice of motion dated 17th July 2023 is hereby dismissed with no orders as to costs.
  • The Deputy Registrar shall within thirty (30) days of delivery of this ruling place the file before the judge for discretion under Section 79B of the Civil Procedure Act and any other appropriate orders the judge may deem fit in respect of expeditious disposal of the appeal.