[2019] KEELC 2601 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal, as the delay was occasioned by the late supply of certified copies of the ruling, which was beyond the applicant's control. The existence of a certificate of delay issued by the lower court corroborated the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELC 2601 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Margaret Muchiri; Respondent: Eliphas Nyaga M’Ribu
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 04 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Delay in Filing, Security for Costs
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Margaret Muchiri
Applicant
Eliphas Nyaga M’Ribu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time to file an appeal out of time.
- 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal was occasioned by factors beyond the applicant's control.
- 3 Whether the respondent would be prejudiced by the grant of leave to appeal out of time.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal, as the delay was occasioned by the late supply of certified copies of the ruling, which was beyond the applicant's control. The existence of a certificate of delay issued by the lower court corroborated the applicant's explanation. The court further noted that the applicant had already deposited the required security for costs, and that granting the application would not prejudice the respondent. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to allow the application for extension of time to file the appeal, directing the applicant to file and serve the record of appeal within 30 days.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- Prayer 3 in the application is allowed; the sum of Kshs.100,000 deposited as security will be held by the court pending disposal of the intended appeal.
- Prayer 4 is allowed; the applicant is directed to file and serve the record of appeal within 30 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURTAT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION CASE NO. 04OF 2019
(Being an application to appeal out of time against the Ruling of the Learned Chief Magistrate Mr. J. M. Njoroge in his Ruling delivered on 24th April, 2019 and in respect of Chuka Chief Magistrate’s Court L.D.T. Case NO. 1 of 2011)
MARGARET MUCHIRI...............................APPLICANT
VERSUS
ELIPHAS NYAGA M’RIBU.....................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This application is dated 12th June, 2019. It states that it has been brought to court Under Rules 4, 42 (1) and 43(1) (3) (a) (Court of Appeal Rules 2010) of Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Cap 9 Laws of Kenya as read with Section 65 (1) and 75 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act and Orders 43 Rules 1 (2), (3), 50 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, Order 42 Rule 6 (1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, Article 159 2 (a), (b), (d) and (e) of the Kenya Constitution 2010, and all other enabling Provisions of the Law).
2. The application has the following grounds:
a) That after the applicant was greatly aggrieved by the Ruling delivered on 24thApril, 2019 and in respect of Chuka CM L.D.D.T Case No. 1 of 2011, he duly instructed M/s Waklaw Advocates to apply for certified copies of the Ruling for the purpose(s) of lodging an appeal.
b) That M/s Waklaw Advocates applied for certified copies of the Ruling on 26th April, 2019, but the same were supplied on 4th June, 2019 and outside the statutory period allowed for lodging appeals.
c) That Chuka Chief Magistrate’s Court in L.D.T. Case No. 1 of 2011 duly issued a certificate of delay on 11th June, 2019 in respect of the supply of the Ruling delivered on 24th April, 2019.
d) That failure to lodge the appeal in time by the applicant was not deliberate and was occasioned by factors beyond the applicant’s control.
e) That it is in interest of justice that the applicant’s application be allowed.
f) That the applicant undertakes to expeditiously file and prosecute the intended appeal, if leave sought is granted.
g) That the orders sought by the applicant would not prejudice the respondent in any event.
3. The application was heard interpartes on 9th July, 2019.
4. As the applicant has already deposited security as ordered by the court on 26th June, 2019, I do find it meritorious to allow prayer 3 in the application. The sum of Kshs.100,000/= deposited as security will be held by the court pending disposal of the intended appeal.
5. Prayer 4 is allowed and the applicant is directed to file and serve the apposite record of appeal within 30 days of today.
6. Costs shall be in the cause.
Delivered in open Court at Chuka this 9th day of July, 2019.
in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Atheru h/b Kirimi for the Applicant
Kijaru for the Respondent
P.M. NJOROGE JUDGE