[2009] KECA 361 (KLR)

[2009] KECA 361 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to write to the Registrar within the prescribed seven days after the single Judge's decision, as required by Rule 54(1)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. However, after excluding the Christmas Vacation period in accordance with Rule 3(e), the effective delay was only fourteen...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KECA 361 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Hezekiah Michoki; Respondent: Elizaphan Onyancha Ombongi
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 4 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Seek Reference to Full Bench
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Reference to Full Court, Court of Appeal Rules, Computation of Time
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Reference to Full Court Court of Appeal Rules Computation of Time

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hezekiah Michoki

Applicant

Elizaphan Onyancha Ombongi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Seek Reference to Full Bench

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to apply in writing to the Registrar for reference of a single Judge's ruling to the full Court.
  2. 2 Whether the delay of fourteen days in making the application was inordinate or excusable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to write to the Registrar within the prescribed seven days after the single Judge's decision, as required by Rule 54(1)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. However, after excluding the Christmas Vacation period in accordance with Rule 3(e), the effective delay was only fourteen days. The court considered the applicant's explanation for the delay, found it extensive and honest, and determined that the delay was not inordinate. Exercising its discretion under Rule 4, the court held that the circumstances justified granting an extension of time for the applicant to write to the Registrar and seek reference of the single Judge's ruling to the full Court.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The notice of motion dated 7th January, 2009 and lodged on 8th January, 2009 is allowed.
  • The applicant shall within seven days deliver the written request to the Registrar and serve a copy upon the respondent.