[2019] KEELC 4299 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 4299 (KLR)

The court found that the Memorandum of Appeal was filed out of time, as the ruling was delivered on 21st July 2017 and the appeal was filed on 4th October 2017, well beyond the statutory thirty-day period. The Appellant did not seek leave of court to file the appeal out of time, nor did she provide sufficient cause...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 4299 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Hamisa Swaleh; Respondent: Rama Swaleh; Respondent: Mauwa Swaleh
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 22 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Appeal
Outcome
Appeal struck out with costs to the Respondents.
Judges
CK Yano
Legal Topics
Appeal Out of Time, Service of Process, Leave to Appeal, Striking Out Pleadings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Appeal Out of Time Service of Process Leave to Appeal Striking Out Pleadings

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hamisa Swaleh

Appellant

Rama Swaleh

Respondent

Mauwa Swaleh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the Memorandum of Appeal was filed out of time without leave of court.
  2. 2 Whether failure to serve the Memorandum of Appeal within the prescribed period renders the appeal incompetent.
  3. 3 Whether procedural defects can be cured under Article 159 of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Memorandum of Appeal was filed out of time, as the ruling was delivered on 21st July 2017 and the appeal was filed on 4th October 2017, well beyond the statutory thirty-day period. The Appellant did not seek leave of court to file the appeal out of time, nor did she provide sufficient cause for the delay through a formal application. The court held that ignorance of the ruling's delivery date and alleged failures by counsel do not excuse non-compliance with clear statutory timelines. The court further held that procedural rules regarding timely filing and service are mandatory and cannot be disregarded under the guise of Article 159 of the Constitution....

Court Disposition

Appeal struck out with costs to the Respondents.

Orders

  • The Memorandum of Appeal dated 8th August 2017 and the Record of Appeal dated 26th February 2018 are struck out.
  • The Appellant shall bear the costs of the application and the appeal.