[2022] KECA 1432 (KLR)

[2022] KECA 1432 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had satisfactorily explained the short delay of 9 days in filing the appeal, attributing it to the late supply of typed proceedings. The delay was not inordinate, and the applicant demonstrated an arguable appeal. The application was unopposed, and there was no evidence of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KECA 1432 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joseph M Gichoya; Respondent: Benson Muriuki Kibata; Respondent: Gikiri Francis Gikiri; Respondent: Gikiri M Njoroge
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 145 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
W Karanja
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Contempt of Court, Trespass, Service of Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Appeals Process Contempt of Court Trespass Service of Process

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph M Gichoya

Applicant

Benson Muriuki Kibata

Respondent

Gikiri Francis Gikiri

Respondent

Gikiri M Njoroge

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time to file and serve an appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal was inordinate or excusable.
  3. 3 Whether the intended appeal is arguable and has a reasonable chance of success.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had satisfactorily explained the short delay of 9 days in filing the appeal, attributing it to the late supply of typed proceedings. The delay was not inordinate, and the applicant demonstrated an arguable appeal. The application was unopposed, and there was no evidence of prejudice to the respondents. The court exercised its discretion under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules to allow the extension of time, emphasizing that such discretion must be exercised judicially and not whimsically, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case. The court also noted that proper compliance with the appellate rules could have avoided the need for the...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant shall file and serve the record of appeal within 14 days from the date of the ruling.
  • If the applicant fails to comply, the orders granted will automatically stand vacated.