[2018] KECA 594 (KLR)

[2018] KECA 594 (KLR)

The applicant failed to file the notice of appeal and appeal within the prescribed time limits, attributing the delay to lack of notice of the ruling's delivery. While the explanation for delay was reasonable and unchallenged, the intended appeal was against an order setting aside an ex parte judgment due to lack of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KECA 594 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Murielma Shirandula Sanya; Respondent: Vincent Osundwa Makokha
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 1 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay of Proceedings
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
GG Okwengu
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Ex Parte Judgment, Service of Process, Stay of Proceedings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Ex Parte Judgment Service of Process Stay of Proceedings

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Murielma Shirandula Sanya

Appellant

Vincent Osundwa Makokha

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay of Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient reason for the delay in filing the appeal and should be granted extension of time to appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings in the Land and Environment Court should be stayed pending the intended appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent would be prejudiced by the grant of the orders sought.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to file the notice of appeal and appeal within the prescribed time limits, attributing the delay to lack of notice of the ruling's delivery. While the explanation for delay was reasonable and unchallenged, the intended appeal was against an order setting aside an ex parte judgment due to lack of service on the respondent. The court found that the learned judge's order allowing the respondent to file a defence and proceed to hearing on merit did not prejudice the applicant, who still had the opportunity to prove his case. Granting the extension would unduly delay the finalization of the dispute and prejudice the respondent, contrary to the overriding objective of...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The applicant's notice of motion dated 24th January, 2018 is dismissed.
  • No orders as to costs.