[2024] KEELC 500 (KLR)

[2024] KEELC 500 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient cause to warrant the grant of leave to appeal out of time. The applicant's explanation for the delay, namely the illness of his advocate on the day of judgment, was not adequate, especially given the prolonged period of inaction and the existence of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEELC 500 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Alfred Omundi Mokobi; Respondent: Mongina Ondora; Respondent: Nyaberi Ondora; Respondent: Machiewa Ondora; Respondent: Magika Ondora
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nyamira
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E011 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
JM Kamau
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Dismissal for Non Attendance, Want of Prosecution, Review of Lower Court Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Leave to Appeal Out of Time Dismissal for Non Attendance Want of Prosecution Review of Lower Court Orders

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alfred Omundi Mokobi

Applicant

Mongina Ondora

Respondent

Nyaberi Ondora

Respondent

Machiewa Ondora

Respondent

Magika Ondora

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to file an appeal out of time from the ruling of the lower court.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient grounds for the delay in filing the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the existence of a pending application for review in the lower court precludes the present application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient cause to warrant the grant of leave to appeal out of time. The applicant's explanation for the delay, namely the illness of his advocate on the day of judgment, was not adequate, especially given the prolonged period of inaction and the existence of a pending application for review in the lower court. The court emphasized that the applicant should await the determination of the review application before seeking leave to appeal. Furthermore, the absence of a draft memorandum of appeal suggested that there was no clear intention to pursue an appeal. Consequently, the application was disallowed with costs to the respondents.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for leave to file an appeal out of time is disallowed.
  • The applicant shall pay costs to the respondents.