[2003] KECA 95 (KLR)
The application for extension of time was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide any explanation for the inordinate delay of one year and four months in filing the appeal. The court found that the proviso to Rule 81(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, which allows for exclusion of time taken to obtain...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2003] KECA 95 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: George Mukuru Muchai; Respondent: The Standard Limited
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application 57 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeal Lodgement, Court of Appeal Rules, Inordinate Delay
- 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
George Mukuru Muchai
Applicant
The Standard Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an extension of time to file an appeal beyond the prescribed period under Rule 81(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
- 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal was explained and if it is excusable.
Ratio Decidendi
The application for extension of time was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide any explanation for the inordinate delay of one year and four months in filing the appeal. The court found that the proviso to Rule 81(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, which allows for exclusion of time taken to obtain proceedings, did not apply as the applicant had not applied for such proceedings. In the absence of any explanation for the delay and with no applicable exception, the court declined to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application for extension of time to file an appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI 57 OF 2002
CORAM: KEIWUA, J.A (IN CHAMBERS)
BETWEEN
GEORGE MUKURU MUCHAI ......................................APPLICANT
AND
THE STANDARD LIMITED ......................................RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
This is an application for extension of time within which to file an appeal from a decision of the superior court delivered on July 11, 2001. In normal circumstances Rule 81(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules provides for an appeal to be instituted within 60 days of the lodgement of the Notice of Appeal which was lodged on July, 12, 2001.
The applicant therefore had up to September 12, 2001 to lodge the appeal. However, the proviso to Rule 81(1) makes an exception where copies of proceedings have been applied for. The time taken in making and providing such copies is to be disregarded in computing the time within which an appeal must be filed. But in this case no such application was made and therefore the proviso to Rule 81(1) does not apply.
The other matter is that the delay involved is one year and 4 months. It is inordinate indeed. What is even more is the fact that it has not been explained at all by the applicant. In that event I am unable to exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant and I dismiss his application with costs.
Dated and delivered this 10th day of February, 2003.
M. Ole KEIWUA
................................... JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original. DEPUTY REGISTRAR