[2019] KEELC 2616 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 2616 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, as the judgment was delivered without her or her counsel's prior notification. The absence of documentary evidence showing that notice of judgment was served on the applicant or her counsel led the court to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 2616 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Lilian Adhiambo Ouma; Respondent: Fredrick Jacob Ochieng
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 27 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay of Execution
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Stay of Execution, Service of Judgment Notice, Status Quo Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Stay of Execution Service of Judgment Notice Status Quo 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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lilian Adhiambo Ouma

Appellant

Fredrick Jacob Ochieng

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay of Execution

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has made a reasonable case for extension of time to file appeal and for an order of stay of execution.
  2. 2 Who should bear the costs of the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, as the judgment was delivered without her or her counsel's prior notification. The absence of documentary evidence showing that notice of judgment was served on the applicant or her counsel led the court to accept the applicant's account. Given that the applicant is in possession of the suit land and has shown intent to appeal, the court held it is fair to maintain the status quo pending determination of the appeal. The court exercised its discretion to extend the time for filing the appeal and granted a stay of execution, with costs to abide the outcome of the appeal.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Time for filing the appeal is extended to the date the memorandum of appeal was filed, which is deemed as served.
  • Parties are ordered to maintain the status quo as of 11th October 2018 in respect of the suit property, pending hearing and determination of the appeal.