[2021] KEHC 6553 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 6553 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant provided a plausible explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, attributing it to the inadvertence of its previous advocate who failed to inform the applicant of the ruling in time. The court held that the right to appeal is constitutionally protected and should not be denied...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 6553 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: National Social Security Fund Board of Trustees; Respondent: Protective Custody Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application E621 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay of Execution
Outcome
application allowed with conditions
Judges
MW Muigai
Legal Topics
Extension of Time to Appeal, Stay of Execution, Right of Audience, Condonation of Delay
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Extension of Time to Appeal Stay of Execution Right of Audience Condonation of Delay

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Social Security Fund Board of Trustees

Applicant

Protective Custody Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay of Execution

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to file an appeal out of time against the ruling of the trial court.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a stay of execution of the decree pending appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in filing the appeal was inordinate and if it has been sufficiently explained.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant provided a plausible explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, attributing it to the inadvertence of its previous advocate who failed to inform the applicant of the ruling in time. The court held that the right to appeal is constitutionally protected and should not be denied due to counsel's mistake, especially where the applicant acted promptly upon learning of the ruling. The court also considered that the applicant had demonstrated an arguable appeal, as its defence was struck out and the amount awarded was not pleaded in the plaint. On the issue of stay of execution, the court noted that the applicant had already paid more than half of the...

Court Disposition

application allowed with conditions

Orders

  • Leave to file appeal out of time is granted, provided the appeal is filed within 45 days from the date of the ruling.
  • The applicant shall deposit Ksh 1,000,000 in a joint interest-earning account in the names of both advocates within 45 days.