[2001] KECA 75 (KLR)

[2001] KECA 75 (KLR)

Despite the applicants providing a weak reason for the delay, the court exercised its unfettered discretion under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules and granted an extension of time to serve the Notice of Appeal. The court considered the explanation provided and, in the interests of justice, allowed the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] KECA 75 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: MC'CLOY SERVICES LIMITED; Applicant: PETER KYALO; Respondent: PURITY A. MUTUKU
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 261 of 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to Serve Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Service of Notice, Court of Appeal Rules
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Service of Notice Court of Appeal Rules

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MC'CLOY SERVICES LIMITED

Applicant

PETER KYALO

Applicant

PURITY A. MUTUKU

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to Serve Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be granted an extension of time to serve the Notice of Appeal out of time.

Ratio Decidendi

Despite the applicants providing a weak reason for the delay, the court exercised its unfettered discretion under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules and granted an extension of time to serve the Notice of Appeal. The court considered the explanation provided and, in the interests of justice, allowed the application, extending the time for service by four days from the date of the ruling.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Time for serving the Notice of Appeal is extended by four days from the date of this ruling.