[1996] KECA 125 (KLR)

[1996] KECA 125 (KLR)

The Court found that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory account for the seven-month delay between the striking out of the appeal and the filing of the application for extension of time. Furthermore, the Court held that the applicant had no right to seek review before the High Court, and therefore had no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1996] KECA 125 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Nelson Wahome Kiriungi; Respondent: Nyawira Ndiuni
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 188 of 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Reference Under Rule 54(1)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules After Dismissal of Application for Extension of Time by a Single Judge
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
JE Gicheru, AM Akiwumi
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals Out of Time, Review of Orders, Discretion of Court
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Out of Time Review of Orders Discretion of Court

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nelson Wahome Kiriungi

Applicant

Nyawira Ndiuni

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Reference Under Rule 54(1)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules After Dismissal of Application for Extension of Time by a Single Judge

  1. 1 Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the notice of appeal and record of appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant had a right to seek review and consequently a right to appeal from the refusal of review by the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory account for the seven-month delay between the striking out of the appeal and the filing of the application for extension of time. Furthermore, the Court held that the applicant had no right to seek review before the High Court, and therefore had no right to appeal from the refusal of review. The Court concluded that the single judge exercised his discretion correctly in dismissing the application for extension of time, and there were no grounds to interfere with that decision.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for leave to file notice of appeal and an appeal out of time is dismissed with costs.