[2005] KEHC 311 (KLR)

[2005] KEHC 311 (KLR)

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the application for enlargement of time to seek leave to appeal because the applicant had not obtained leave from the lower court as required. The appeal itself was incompetent for being filed without leave and out of time. The proper procedure would have been...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] KEHC 311 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Mbinyo Mulokya; Appellant: Elizabeth Wayua; Respondent: Edward Nguli
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 38 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Enlargement of Time and Leave to Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed; appeal struck out as incompetent
Judges
DA Onyancha
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Enlargement of Time, Jurisdiction, Incompetent Appeal
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Enlargement of Time Jurisdiction Incompetent Appeal

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

Mbinyo Mulokya

Appellant

Elizabeth Wayua

Appellant

Edward Nguli

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Enlargement of Time and Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain an application for enlargement of time to seek leave to appeal when no leave was obtained from the lower court.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal filed without leave and out of time is competent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the application for enlargement of time to seek leave to appeal because the applicant had not obtained leave from the lower court as required. The appeal itself was incompetent for being filed without leave and out of time. The proper procedure would have been to seek leave from the lower court before filing the appeal. As the application and the appeal were both procedurally defective, the court dismissed the application and struck out the appeal for want of jurisdiction and non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements.

Court Disposition

application dismissed; appeal struck out as incompetent

Orders

  • The application for enlargement of time and leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
  • The appeal filed without leave of court is struck out and dismissed.