[2020] KECA 264 (KLR)

[2020] KECA 264 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had filed the notice of appeal on time and that the delay in filing the record of appeal was due to the late availability of the necessary proceedings, ruling, and order from the trial court. The applicant received these documents only after the time for lodging the record of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KECA 264 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Lentek Sokoiyon; Respondent: The Land Registrar, Kajiado North Sub-County; Respondent: The District Land Surveyor, Kajiado North Sub-County; Respondent: Kausau Ole Kurende; Respondent: Sarapin Sokoiyon; Respondent: Murera Church; Respondent: Simita Ole Parantai
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application E245 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
S ole Kantai
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Delay in Filing, Review of Court Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Appeal Procedure Delay in Filing Review of Court Orders

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lentek Sokoiyon

Applicant

The Land Registrar, Kajiado North Sub-County

Respondent

The District Land Surveyor, Kajiado North Sub-County

Respondent

Kausau Ole Kurende

Respondent

Sarapin Sokoiyon

Respondent

Murera Church

Respondent

Simita Ole Parantai

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient reason for the delay in filing the appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to file the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents would suffer prejudice if the extension is granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had filed the notice of appeal on time and that the delay in filing the record of appeal was due to the late availability of the necessary proceedings, ruling, and order from the trial court. The applicant received these documents only after the time for lodging the record of appeal had lapsed. The court was satisfied that there was no inordinate delay and that the applicant should be given an opportunity to pursue the intended appeal. There was no evidence of prejudice to the respondents. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to allow the application for extension of time.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant shall lodge the record of appeal within 30 days of the ruling date.
  • The record of appeal shall be served on the respondents accordingly.