[2023] KEELC 21584 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 21584 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant's delay in filing the appeal was not unreasonable, given that the judgment was to be delivered on notice and there was no evidence that such notice was actually served on the applicant or his advocate. The court emphasized that it is incumbent upon the court to ensure that notice...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 21584 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Arthur Barasa Kupara; Respondent: Wycliffe Aggrey Emirundi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Miscellaneous Case E010 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
DO Ohungo
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Service of Judgment Notice, Appeals From Subordinate Courts
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Out of Time Service of Judgment Notice Appeals From Subordinate Courts

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arthur Barasa Kupara

Applicant

Wycliffe Aggrey Emirundi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established sufficient cause for extension of time to file an appeal out of time against the judgment of the Subordinate Court.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal was reasonable and excusable.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent would suffer prejudice if the extension is granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's delay in filing the appeal was not unreasonable, given that the judgment was to be delivered on notice and there was no evidence that such notice was actually served on the applicant or his advocate. The court emphasized that it is incumbent upon the court to ensure that notice of delivery of judgment reaches the parties or their advocates. Since there was no proof of such notice and the delay was only about a month, the applicant had established sufficient cause for extension of time. The court also found that any prejudice to the respondent could be compensated by costs, and thus granted the application for leave to appeal out of time.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the applicant to appeal out of time against the judgment delivered by the Senior Principal Magistrate’s Court at Butali on 21st February 2023 in Butali MCELC No. 63 of 2018.
  • The Memorandum of Appeal shall be filed and served within 14 days from the date of this ruling; in default, the Notice of Motion dated 23rd April 2023 shall stand dismissed.