[2014] KECA 668 (KLR)
The court found that the delay in bringing the application for extension of time to file the record of appeal was inordinate and not satisfactorily explained. The applicants failed to provide a certificate of delay or credible evidence that the delay was attributable to the court registry. The explanation offered,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KECA 668 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: John Ngari; Appellant: Joseph Njeru Ireri; Appellant: Christiano Njiru; Appellant: Njiru Mbeca; Respondent: Ndathi Mbiti
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application 35 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Record of Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- ARM Visram
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Discretion of Court
- 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
John Ngari
Appellant
Joseph Njeru Ireri
Appellant
Christiano Njiru
Appellant
Njiru Mbeca
Appellant
Ndathi Mbiti
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Record of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants have provided sufficient reason for the delay in filing the record of appeal.
- 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to extend time for filing the record of appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the delay in bringing the application for extension of time to file the record of appeal was inordinate and not satisfactorily explained. The applicants failed to provide a certificate of delay or credible evidence that the delay was attributable to the court registry. The explanation offered, namely pressure of work and inadvertence by counsel and the court clerk, was deemed unreasonable and unacceptable. Applying the principles set out in Leo Sila Mutiso v. Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi, the court concluded that the application lacked merit and declined to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicants.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for extension of time to file the record of appeal is disallowed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NYERI
(CORAM: VISRAM, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS))
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 35 OF 2013
BETWEEN
JOHN NGARI...................................................................…… 1ST APPELLANT
JOSEPH NJERU IRERI...........................................................2ND APPELLANT
CHRISTIANO NJIRU..............................................................3RD APPELLANT
NJIRU MBECA.........................................................................4TH APPELLANT
AND
NDATHI MBITI..................................………………...................RESPONDENT
An application to appeal out of time from the Ruling of the High Court of Kenya
at Embu (Muchelule, J.) dated 1st February, 2012
in
H. C. C. C. No. 79 of 2005)
**************
RULING
This is an application under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules for extension of time to file the record of appeal, from the ruling and order of the High Court of Kenya (Muchelule, J.) dated 28th February, 2012. The application is supported by the affidavit of John Ngari sworn 3rd December, 2013.
The ruling in the case before the High Court was delivered on 28th February 2012, although the application erroneously states the same to have been delivered on 1st February, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed on time on 5th March, 2012. However, thereafter, both the applicant and his counsel went to slumber. The record of appeal should have been filed within sixty (60) days of the filing of the Notice of Appeal. The applicant says that the copies of the proceedings were delivered to his counsel on 10th September, 2013. However, there is no proof of this.
The applicant has not exhibited a certificate of delay, and there is no way of knowing whether the delay upto 10th September 2013, was indeed attributable to the court registry. In any event, this application was filed on 4th December 2013, almost three months thereafter, and the reason for delay is explained as follows in the supporting affidavit:
“Paragraph 7: That due to pressure of work, my counsel lost track of the file and it was inadvertently filed away by the court clerk who was not aware of the fact that the record of appeal was yet to be prepared.
Paragraph 8: That it only came to his attention that we had not prepared the record of appeal when he was preparing his yearly schedule and thus prompting the instant application before this court”.
Having considered the application and the deposition in support of the same, and having heard counsel, I am of the view that the delay in bringing this application is inordinate given that there is no certificate of delay, and that the delay is otherwise not explained satisfactorily, and where it is explained as in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the supporting affidavit, the explanation is lame, unreasonable, and unacceptable. Rule 4 of the Rules of this Court gives me unfettered discretion whether to extend time or not. However, that discretion has to be exercised judiciously, and in accordance with the principles set out in Leo Sila Mutiso vs. Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi– Civil Application No. NAI. 251 of 1997 where this Court stated:
“It is now settled that the decision whether or not to extend the time for appealing is essentially discretionary. It is also well settled that in general the matters which this court takes into account in deciding whether to grant an extension of time are first the length of the delay. Secondly, the reason for the delay, thirdly (possibly) the chances of the appeal succeeding if the application is granted and fourthly the degree of prejudice to the respondent if the application is granted.”
I have taken into account all the factors indicated above, and am of the view that this application has no merit, and I disallow the same. I make no orders as to costs as the respondent's counsel, though served, did not appear before me.
Dated and delivered at Nyeri this 31st day of March, 2014.
ALNASHIR VISRAM
….....................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR