[2022] KECA 378 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the notice and record of appeal, namely the failure of her former lawyers to inform her of the judgment in time. Upon learning of the judgment, the applicant acted promptly by instructing new counsel to pursue the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KECA 378 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Esther Wacheke Mwangi; Respondent: Joseph Mbau Gitau
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application E425 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Extension of time granted.
- Judges
- S ole Kantai
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Judicial Discretion
- 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
Esther Wacheke Mwangi
Applicant
Joseph Mbau Gitau
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient reason for the delay in filing the notice and record of appeal.
- 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to extend time for filing the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the notice and record of appeal, namely the failure of her former lawyers to inform her of the judgment in time. Upon learning of the judgment, the applicant acted promptly by instructing new counsel to pursue the appeal. The court was satisfied that the delay was not inordinate and that there were arguable points in the intended appeal. Applying the relevant principles governing the exercise of discretion to extend time, the court exercised its discretion in favour of the applicant and granted the extension sought.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Extension of time granted.
Orders
- The applicant shall file the Notice of Appeal within 14 days of the ruling date.
- The applicant shall file the Record of Appeal within 30 days thereafter.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Mwangi v Gitau (Civil Application E425 of 2021) [2022] KECA 378 (KLR) (25 February 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KECA 378 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Civil Application E425 of 2021
S ole Kantai, JA
February 25, 2022
Between
Esther Wacheke Mwangi
Applicant
and
Joseph Mbau Gitau
Respondent
(Being an application for extension of time from the Judgment of the Environment and Land Court of Kenya at Nairobi (E.O. Obaga, J.) dated 29th October, 2020 in E.L.C. Case No. 586 of 2008)
Ruling
1. In the Motion brought under Sections 3A and 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules I am asked in the main to extend time for filing notice of appeal and record of appeal out of time from the Judgment of the Environment and Land Court (“ELC”) delivered on 29th October, 2020. In grounds in support of the application and in a supporting affidavit of the applicant Esther Wacheke Mwangi it is stated amongst other things that the lawyer then on record failed to attend court when Judgment was delivered (29th October, 2020); that the applicant was not notified of delivery of that Judgment until 17th November, 2020; she then instructed another law firm which moved the ELC to be allowed to come on record for the applicant and for leave to file notice of appeal out of time; a ruling was delivered on 28th October, 2021 where the application was not allowed. The applicant says, in addition, that she is aggrieved by the said Judgment and desires to appeal; that the delay in not filing notice of appeal is not inordinate; she blames her former lawyers for not taking appropriate steps to file an appeal.
2. I have not seen any replying affidavit by the respondent and I note that a Hearing Notice was served by the Deputy Registrar by email on 31st January, 2022 to “[Particulars Witheld]advocate@gmail.com, [Particulars Witheld]advocates.com, [Particulars Witheld]advocates.co.ke, [Particulars Witheld]@gmail.com; [Particulars Witheld]advocates@gmail.com”. That hearing notice informed the parities of the hearing date and parties were required to file written submission within time specified.I have seen written submissions filed for the applicant which I have perused and considered.
3. The principles that govern consideration of applications for extension of time were well set out in the decision of a single Judge as affirmed by the full bench in the case of Fakir Mohamed v Joseph Mugambi & 2 Others Civil Application No. 332 of 2004 as follows:“The exercise of this Court’s discretion under Rule 4 has followed a well-beaten path since the stricture of “sufficient reason” was removed by amendment in 1985. As it is unfettered, there is no limit to the number of factors the court would consider so long as they are relevant. The period of delay, the reason for the delay (possibly) the chances of the appeal succeeding if the application is granted, the degree of prejudice to the respondent if the application is granted, the effect of the delay on public administration, the importance of compliance with time limits, the resources of the parties, whether the matter raises issues of public importance – are all relevant but not exhaustive factors: See Mutiso v Mwangi, Civil Application No. NAI. 255 of 1997 (ur), Mwangi v Kenya Airways Limited [2003] KLR 496, Major Joseph Mwereri Igweta v Murika Methare & Attorney General Civil Application No. NAI 8 of 2000 (ur) and Murai v Wainaina (No. 4) 1982 KLR 38. ”
4. The applicant here says that she had lawyers on record who did not attend court and did not inform her that Judgment had been delivered until 20 days had elapsed. One of the annextures to the application is a letter dated 17th November, 2020 addressed to the applicant by M/S Muttisya & Company Advocates which informs the applicant that Judgment had been delivered and that an appeal should be lodged. The letter indicates “Advance copy by Email” but no email address is provided. I note that Judgment was delivered on 29th October, 2020 and the said letter is dated 17th November, 2020 by which time the time contemplated for lodging a notice of appeal had elapsed.
5. The applicant says that she was frustrated by her former lawyers who did not give her necessary information on the case in court. She further says that as soon as she found out that Judgment had been delivered she appointed another law firm to pursue an appeal on her behalf.I have seen draft Memorandum of Appeal attached to the application and I think there are arguable points in the intended appeal.
6. The applicant has satisfied me on the relevant principles to be applied in an application of this nature and I exercise my discretion in her favour. Let the applicant file Notice of Appeal within 14 days of today and Record of Appeal within 30 days thereafter. I make no order on costs.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022. S. ole KANTAI………………..………..JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a true copy of the original.SignedDEPUTY REGISTRAR