[2025] KECA 646 (KLR)

[2025] KECA 646 (KLR)

The application for leave to file a notice of appeal and appeal out of time was dismissed because neither the applicants nor the respondents complied with the court's express directions to file and serve written submissions within the specified timelines. The court, exercising its discretion under rule 58(1) of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KECA 646 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Richard W Masinde; Applicant: Chris Makhanu Masinde; Applicant: Captain (Rtd) Charles Masinde; Respondent: Gladys Nasimiyu Nyongesa; Respondent: Gladys Nanyama Masinde
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application E157 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to File Notice of Appeal and Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application dismissed for non-compliance with court directions
Judges
LA Achode
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Court Directions Noncompliance
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Process Court Directions Noncompliance

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

Richard W Masinde

Applicant

Chris Makhanu Masinde

Applicant

Captain (Rtd) Charles Masinde

Applicant

Gladys Nasimiyu Nyongesa

Respondent

Gladys Nanyama Masinde

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to File Notice of Appeal and Appeal Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be granted leave to file a notice of appeal and appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether failure to comply with court directions warrants dismissal of the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to file a notice of appeal and appeal out of time was dismissed because neither the applicants nor the respondents complied with the court's express directions to file and serve written submissions within the specified timelines. The court, exercising its discretion under rule 58(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022, found that non-compliance with procedural directions justified dismissal of the application, regardless of its substantive merits. The court emphasized that adherence to procedural rules and directions is mandatory for the orderly administration of justice, and parties who fail to comply risk having their applications dismissed summarily. No orders...

Court Disposition

application dismissed for non-compliance with court directions

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 30th October 2024 is dismissed under rule 58(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022, for failure to comply with directions by the applicant.
  • There will be no orders as to costs.