[2001] KECA 282 (KLR)
The Court found that the single Judge properly exercised his discretion in granting the extension of time, noting that the applicant had already been penalized by the striking out of the previous appeal and that there was no delay in bringing the application. The Court saw no reason to interfere with the single...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2001] KECA 282 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Industrial & Commercial Development Corporation; Respondent: Sum Model Industries Ltd
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application 248 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Reference From Single Judge to Full Bench on Extension of Time
- Outcome
- reference dismissed with costs to the respondent
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Exercise of Discretion
- 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
Industrial & Commercial Development Corporation
Applicant
Sum Model Industries Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Reference From Single Judge to Full Bench on Extension of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the single Judge exercised discretion correctly in granting extension of time to file notice and record of appeal.
- 2 Whether the reasons for striking out the previous appeal should bar the grant of extension of time.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that the single Judge properly exercised his discretion in granting the extension of time, noting that the applicant had already been penalized by the striking out of the previous appeal and that there was no delay in bringing the application. The Court saw no reason to interfere with the single Judge's decision, as there was no evidence of wrongful exercise of discretion.
Court Disposition
reference dismissed with costs to the respondent
Orders
- The reference is dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: OMOLO, TUNOI & O'KUBASU, JJ.A. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI 248 OF 2001 (132/01 UR)
BETWEEN
INDUSTRIAL & COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ...........APPLICANT
AND
SUM MODEL INDUSTRIES LTD ............................................................... RESPONDENT
(An application for extension of time to file notice & record of appeal in an intended appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mbogholi J) dated 16th February, 2000
in
H.C.C.C. NO. 3389 OF 1994) *****************
RULING OF THE COURT
There is absolutely no merit in this reference. The previous appeal was struck out on 9th July, 2001; the motion was filed on 19th July, 2001. Mr Keyonzo concedes there was no delay there. But Mr Keyonzo wanted the single Judge to refuse the application for extension of time because of the very same reasons which led to the previous appeal being struck out. The single Judge refused to accede to that objection and held that the applicant before him had been sufficiently punished when its appeal was struck out. We see nothing to show any wrong exercise of discretion. We dismiss this reference with costs to the respondents.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 4th day of December, 2001.
R. S. C. OMOLO ……………………... JUDGE OF APPEAL
P. K. TUNOI …………………………. JUDGE OF APPEAL
E. O. O'KUBASU ………………………..... JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original. DEPUTY REGISTRAR