[2024] KECA 837 (KLR)

[2024] KECA 837 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants satisfactorily explained the reason for the delay in filing the record of appeal, attributing it to the mistake of their previous advocate. The delay was not inordinate, being only 14 days, and the applicants acted promptly upon discovering the omission. The court further held...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KECA 837 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kipkoech Arap Maina; Applicant: Augustine Kimutai Koech; Respondent: Paul Kipketer Keino; Respondent: The Chief Land Registrar; Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application E044 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
JW Lessit
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Lodgment, Mistake of Advocate, Land Ownership Dispute
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Appeal Lodgment Mistake of Advocate Land Ownership Dispute

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kipkoech Arap Maina

Applicant

Augustine Kimutai Koech

Applicant

Paul Kipketer Keino

Respondent

The Chief Land Registrar

Respondent

The Hon. Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have provided sufficient reason for the delay in filing the substantive appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal is inordinate or excusable.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents will suffer prejudice if the extension of time is granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants satisfactorily explained the reason for the delay in filing the record of appeal, attributing it to the mistake of their previous advocate. The delay was not inordinate, being only 14 days, and the applicants acted promptly upon discovering the omission. The court further held that the respondents had not demonstrated any prejudice they would suffer if the extension was granted. In exercising its discretion under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, the court concluded that it would be just to allow the applicants to file their appeal out of time, ensuring that they are not shut out of the appellate process due to their advocate's error.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the applicants to lodge their appeal out of time.
  • The applicants shall file the Record of Appeal within 14 days from the date of the ruling and serve it within 21 days from the date of filing.