[1999] KECA 175 (KLR)
The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay in filing the notices of appeal. The applicant was aware of its advocate's inaction since 1996 but took no steps to remedy the situation. The court found the application to be belated, an...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1999] KECA 175 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kariuki and Gathecha Resources Ltd.; Respondent: Lucky Summer Estate Limited (also known as Lucky Summer Estate Co. Ltd); Respondent: Gitathuro Kariobangi Company Limited (alias Gitathuro Company Limited); Respondent: Huruma Kuga Na Gwika (alias Huruma Kuga Na Gwika Company Limited); Respondent: Ngunyumu Housing Company Limited (alias Ngunyumu Company Limited)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 123 of 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application to Serve Notice of Appeal Out of Time
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Notice of Appeal, Discretion of Court, Delay in Filing, Costs Award
- 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
Kariuki and Gathecha Resources Ltd.
Applicant
Lucky Summer Estate Limited (also known as Lucky Summer Estate Co. Ltd)
Respondent
Gitathuro Kariobangi Company Limited (alias Gitathuro Company Limited)
Respondent
Huruma Kuga Na Gwika (alias Huruma Kuga Na Gwika Company Limited)
Respondent
Ngunyumu Housing Company Limited (alias Ngunyumu Company Limited)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Serve Notice of Appeal Out of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient explanation for the inordinate delay in filing the notices of appeal.
- 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to allow the notice of appeal to be served out of time.
- 3 Whether the application is defective for want of leave to appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay in filing the notices of appeal. The applicant was aware of its advocate's inaction since 1996 but took no steps to remedy the situation. The court found the application to be belated, an afterthought, and contrary to the public interest in finality of litigation. Additionally, the application was defective as no leave to appeal had been sought or granted, rendering the intended appeal a non-starter. The court declined to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant and dismissed the application with costs.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application to serve notice of appeal out of time is dismissed with costs.
- Leave to file a reference from this ruling is granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: TUNOI, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 123 OF 1999
BETWEEN
KARIUKI AND GATHECHA RESOURCES LTD. ................ APPLICANT
AND
1. LUCKY SUMMER ESTATE LIMITED (ALSO KNOWN AS LUCKY SUMMER ESTATE CO. LTD) 1ST RESPONDENT
2. GITATHURO KARIOBANGI COMPANY LIMITED (ALIAS GITATHURO COMPANY LIMITED) ........................ 2ND RESPONDENT 3. HURUMA KUGA NA GWIKA (ALIAS HURUMA KUGA NA GWIKA COMPANY LIMITED) 3RD RESPONDENT 4. NGUNYUMU HOUSING COMPANY LIMITED (ALIAS NGUNYUMU COMPANY LIMITED) ........... 4TH RESPONDENT
(Application to serve notice of appeal out of time from the four rulings and orders of the High Court of Kenya (E. O'Kubasu, J.) dated 8th November, 1995, 8th or 10th May, 1995, 7th March, 1996 and 26th July, 1996
in
H.C.C.C. 2587 OF 1994) *************** R U L I N G
This application is plainly without merit. There has been an inordinate delay in filing the notices of appeal. The delay has not been explained to my satisfaction. The applicant knew way back in 1996 that its advocate was lax and indolent and would not act. Yet it did not take any action. In such circumstances I will not exercise my discretion in its favour.
I would think that this application is belated and an afterthought. It is in public interest that litigation does come to an end. The application before me seeks to prolong it without any justification.
Moreover, the application is defective and the intended appeal a non-starter in view of the fact that no leave to appeal was either sought or granted. I refuse the application. I dismiss it with costs.
Made at Nairobi this 8th day of July, 1999.
P. K. TUNOI
...............
JUDGE OF APPEAL
Order:Leave to file a reference from this ruling granted.
P. K. TUNOI
...............
JUDGE OF APPEAL
8 - 7 - 99
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR