[2017] KEELRC 409 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 409 (KLR)

The court found that while the respondent's delay of about three months in seeking to file a notice of appeal was not fully explained, the delay was not inordinate and was excusable in the circumstances. The court exercised its discretion under the Civil Procedure Act, Civil Procedure Rules, and the Constitution to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 409 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Humphrey Mukundi Mwangi; Respondent: Bradegate Holdings Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 56 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed in part
Judges
B Ongaya
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals Procedure, Mistake of Counsel, Court Discretion, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Extension of Time Appeals Procedure Mistake of Counsel Court Discretion Costs Award

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Humphrey Mukundi Mwangi

Claimant

Bradegate Holdings Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent should be granted an extension of time to file a Notice of Appeal from the judgment delivered on 14.07.2017.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the notice of appeal was adequately explained and excusable.
  3. 3 Whether the mistakes of counsel should be visited upon the litigant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while the respondent's delay of about three months in seeking to file a notice of appeal was not fully explained, the delay was not inordinate and was excusable in the circumstances. The court exercised its discretion under the Civil Procedure Act, Civil Procedure Rules, and the Constitution to grant an extension of time, emphasizing that justice should not be defeated by technicalities and that mistakes of counsel should not be visited upon the litigant. The court also clarified its jurisdiction to grant such extension for filing a notice of appeal, but not for filing the memorandum and record of appeal at the Court of Appeal, which must be sought from that court....

Court Disposition

application allowed in part

Orders

  • Extension of time is granted to the respondent to lodge a Notice of Appeal from the judgment within 14 days from the date of the ruling.
  • The respondent is to pay the claimant's costs of the application.