[1997] KECA 347 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant failed to provide any explanation or material to justify the delay of over four months in bringing the application for extension of time. In the absence of any explanation for the delay, the court declined to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant. The application was...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1997] KECA 347 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kairu Enterprises Limited; Respondent: Gitundu Developers Limited
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 198 of 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs to the respondent
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeals Process, 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
Kairu Enterprises Limited
Applicant
Gitundu Developers Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient explanation for the delay in filing the notice of appeal out of time.
- 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to grant an extension of time to the applicant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant failed to provide any explanation or material to justify the delay of over four months in bringing the application for extension of time. In the absence of any explanation for the delay, the court declined to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant. The application was therefore dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Orders
- The application for extension of time to file a notice of appeal out of time is dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
CORAM: OMOLO, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS)
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 198 OF 1996
KAIRU ENTERPRISES LIMITED .............................
APPLICANTANDGITUNDU DEVELOPERS LIMITED ...........................
RESPONDENT
(Application for extension of time to file a Notice of Appeal out of time in an intended appeal from a ruling/judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mr. Justice Shields) dated 2nd May, 1991 in H.C.C.S. NO. 3699 OF 1990)
********************RULING OF THE COURT
I do not think the applicant is serious in the matter. Its previous appeal was struck out on the 14th February, 1996; this application was not brought until the 19th June, 1996. That, as Miss. Kamau correctly points out, is a delay of over four months. There is not a single word in the affidavit as in the submissions of Mr. Muttu in explanation of that delAy. In those circumstances, I hold that the applicant has wholly failed to place before me any material upon which if I can exercise my discretion in its favour. I refuse to do so and the consequence of that is that this application fails and it is hereby dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 24th day of April, 1997.
R. S. C. OMOLO
...............JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR