[2019] KEELC 457 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant had demonstrated vigilance in pursuing the appeal and had taken steps to prepare the record of appeal. The failure to file the necessary application for change of advocates and extension of time was attributed to the mistake of counsel, not the appellant. The respondent did not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELC 457 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: M’Mugwika M’Rugongo; Respondent: The Settlement Fund Trustee; Respondent: Peter N. Kirigua
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal 42 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Change of Advocates
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Change of Advocates, Admission of Appeal Record, Appeal Out of Time
- 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
M’Mugwika M’Rugongo
Appellant
The Settlement Fund Trustee
Respondent
Peter N. Kirigua
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Change of Advocates
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant should be granted leave to change advocates after judgment.
- 2 Whether the appellant should be granted extension of time to file and serve the memorandum and record of appeal out of time.
- 3 Whether the memorandum and record of appeal already filed should be admitted as properly filed.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant had demonstrated vigilance in pursuing the appeal and had taken steps to prepare the record of appeal. The failure to file the necessary application for change of advocates and extension of time was attributed to the mistake of counsel, not the appellant. The respondent did not show any prejudice that would result from granting the orders sought. In the interest of justice and to allow the appeal to be determined on its merits, the court exercised its discretion to allow the change of advocates, extend the time for filing the appeal, and admit the memorandum and record of appeal as properly filed.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The firm of Mmbos Mutunga Advocates and Charles Kariuki and Kiome Advocates are allowed to come on record for the appellant in place of Mokua Obiria Advocates.
- The time for filing an appeal is extended; the memorandum of appeal filed on 12.2.2019 is deemed properly filed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
35 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU
ELC APPEAL NO. 42 OF 2019
M’MUGWIKA M’RUGONGO …….....……………………… APPELLANT
VERSUS
THE SETTLEMENT FUND TRUSTEE …....………….. 1ST RESPONDENT
PETER N. KIRIGUA ……………………………………. 2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The application dated 19. 8.2019 seeks the following orders:
(a) That this honourable court be pleased to allow the firm of MMboos Mutunga & Co Advocates and firm of Charles Kariuki & Kiome Advocates to come on record on behalf of the appellant/applicant herein in place of the firm of Mokua Obiria & associates advocates.
(b) That the applicant be granted leave of court to lodge an appeal, file and serve the memorandum of appeal in respect of the judgment in Meru Chief Magistrate civil case No. 11 of 2009 delivered on 23rd January 2019 out of time and/or there be an extension of time for filling and service of the appeal.
(c) That the honourable court be pleased to admit the memorandum of appeal filled on 12th February 2019 and the record of appeal filled on 14th June 2019.
(d) That the cost of this application be provided.
2. The grounds in support of the application are that:
i. The appellant filed a memorandum of appeal within the specified time.
ii. The applicant has noticed that it is necessary for the applicant to formally change the advocate who acted for him at lower court.
iii. That during the filing of the memorandum and the record of appeal, the current advocates erroneously failed to put a consent or application to come on record upon entry of lower court judgment.
iv. That the mistake of failing to file the application for leave to come on record on behalf of the applicant was occasioned by the current advocate on record.
v. That it is in the best interest of justice that the appellant/applicant is allowed to regularize his appeal so that it can be determined on merits.
vi. That the applicant’s appeal has merits with high chances of success.
vii. That the orders sought shall not prejudice the respondents.
3. The application is also supported by the supporting affidavit of Mutunga Muriithi.
4. The application has been opposed by the 2nd respondent who avers that the appellant/applicant was aware that the application seeking leave to file an appeal out of time ought to be heard by this court in the first instance before the appeal was filed and equally, the consent from the outgoing advocate ought to have been availed first. He therefore contends that the appeal and record of Appeal were filed out of time.
5. I have considered all the issues raised herein. In particular, I have taken into consideration that the applicant has been vigilant and has even gone to great lengths to have the Record of Appeal prepared. The respondent has not demonstrated in which way he stands to suffer if the application is allowed.
6. In the circumstances, I allow the application in the following terms:
1) The firm of Mmbos Mutunga advocates and Charles Kariuki and Kiome advocates are hereby allowed to come on record for the appellant in place of Mokua Obiria Advocates.
2) The time for filing an appeal is hereby extended whereby the memorandum of appeal filed on 12. 2.2019 is deemed to have been properly filed.
3) The record of appeal filed on 14. 6.2019 is also admitted herein.
4) The costs herein shall abide the outcome of the appeal.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 27TH NOVEMBER, 2019 IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
C/A: Kananu
Mutegi holding brief for Aketch for 2nd respondent
Ondieki holding brief for Kiome for appellant also Ouma holding brief for Mutunga for appellant
HON. LUCY. N. MBUGUA
ELC JUDGE