[2025] KECA 1015 (KLR)

[2025] KECA 1015 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants failed to comply with the mandatory requirement under Rule 84(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, as their request for proceedings was made outside the thirty-day window from the date of the judgment. Consequently, they could not benefit from the proviso that would have excluded the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KECA 1015 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joyce Wanjiru Macharia; Applicant: Peter Mathu; Applicant: Annefa Limited; Applicant: Jostepa Investment Co Limited; Respondent: Patrick Karanja Gakuu; Respondent: Samson Mwangi Njoroge
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application E462 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Record of Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
W Karanja
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Court of Appeal Rules, Record of Appeal Filing, Environment and Land Court Judgments
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Appeal Procedure Court of Appeal Rules Record of Appeal Filing Environment and Land Court Judgments

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

Joyce Wanjiru Macharia

Applicant

Peter Mathu

Applicant

Annefa Limited

Applicant

Jostepa Investment Co Limited

Applicant

Patrick Karanja Gakuu

Respondent

Samson Mwangi Njoroge

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have satisfied the requirements for extension of time to file the record of appeal under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants can rely on the proviso to Rule 84 of the Court of Appeal Rules given the timing of their request for proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to comply with the mandatory requirement under Rule 84(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, as their request for proceedings was made outside the thirty-day window from the date of the judgment. Consequently, they could not benefit from the proviso that would have excluded the period required for preparation of proceedings from the computation of time for filing the record of appeal. The non-compliance with the rule rendered the application for extension of time fatally defective. The absence of opposition from the respondents did not cure the procedural default. Accordingly, the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for extension of time to file the record of appeal is dismissed.
  • There shall be no order as to costs.