[2016] KEHC 4527 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 4527 (KLR)

The court found that although the delay of five months in filing the appeal was lengthy, the explanation provided by the applicants—that they lacked means to pursue the appeal until assisted by a well-wisher—was reasonable in the circumstances. The court emphasized that poverty can impede access to justice and that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEHC 4527 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Janai Lalai Tungusho; Applicant: Alice Nadupoi Lenaitukusho (Suing as the legal administrators of the Estate of Esmare Ndanaitukusho); Respondent: East African Mission Orphanage; Respondent: Spinks Ralph
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Naivasha
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application 72 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
CW Meoli
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals Out of Time, Judicial Discretion, Delay in Filing, Access to Justice
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Out of Time Judicial Discretion Delay in Filing Access to Justice

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janai Lalai Tungusho

Applicant

Alice Nadupoi Lenaitukusho (Suing as the legal administrators of the Estate of Esmare Ndanaitukusho)

Applicant

East African Mission Orphanage

Respondent

Spinks Ralph

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have provided sufficient explanation for the delay in filing the appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to enlarge time for filing an appeal under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act.
  3. 3 Whether the intended appeal is arguable and not frivolous.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the delay of five months in filing the appeal was lengthy, the explanation provided by the applicants—that they lacked means to pursue the appeal until assisted by a well-wisher—was reasonable in the circumstances. The court emphasized that poverty can impede access to justice and that the Constitution obligates courts to ensure justice is done to all, irrespective of status. The court further found that the intended appeal was not frivolous and that there was no indication the respondents would suffer undue prejudice if the extension was granted. Balancing all relevant factors, the court exercised its discretion to allow the applicants to file their appeal...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Prayer 2 of the Notice of Motion is granted; the applicants shall file the appeal within 21 days from the date of the ruling.
  • Costs will abide the outcome of the appeal.