[2005] KEHC 2828 (KLR)

[2005] KEHC 2828 (KLR)

The court found that while there was some delay by the court in supplying the proceedings and judgment, the applicant took an additional four months before bringing the application and failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for this further delay. The applicant did not disclose his means or explain why he did...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] KEHC 2828 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Johnson Mburu Muiruri; Defendant: Julius Kang’ara Ndegwa
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 127 of 2004
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
GG Okwengu
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals Out of Time, Judicial Discretion, Delay in Filing, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Out of Time Judicial Discretion Delay in Filing 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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johnson Mburu Muiruri

Applicant

Julius Kang’ara Ndegwa

Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to enlarge time for filing the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while there was some delay by the court in supplying the proceedings and judgment, the applicant took an additional four months before bringing the application and failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for this further delay. The applicant did not disclose his means or explain why he did not file the appeal in person, despite being capable of initiating private proceedings. The court held that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient cause for the delay and that the discretion to enlarge time should not be exercised in his favour. Consequently, the application was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for enlargement of time to file appeal out of time is dismissed with costs to the respondent.