[2025] KECA 899 (KLR)

[2025] KECA 899 (KLR)

The court held that the applicants, having had their application for extension of time dismissed by a single judge for lack of jurisdiction, could not refile the same application before another single judge. The proper procedure was to seek reference to the full court under Rule 57 of the Court of Appeal Rules. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KECA 899 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Hannah Njeri Ngorongo; Applicant: David Irungu Ngorongo; Applicant: Joseph Makanga Ngorongo; Applicant: Stephen Wagereka Ngorongo; Applicant: Philip Wachira Ngorongo; Applicant: Samuel Mwangi Ngorongo; Respondent: David Wachira Wangui; Respondent: John Makanga Wangui; Respondent: Francis Mwangi Wangui; Respondent: Raphael Ngorongo Wangui; Respondent: Veronicah Wanjiru Wangui
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application E478 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondents
Judges
W Karanja
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Notice of Appeal, Abuse of Process, Probate and Administration
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Family and Children Extension of Time Notice of Appeal Abuse of Process Probate and Administration

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hannah Njeri Ngorongo

Applicant

David Irungu Ngorongo

Applicant

Joseph Makanga Ngorongo

Applicant

Stephen Wagereka Ngorongo

Applicant

Philip Wachira Ngorongo

Applicant

Samuel Mwangi Ngorongo

Applicant

David Wachira Wangui

Respondent

John Makanga Wangui

Respondent

Francis Mwangi Wangui

Respondent

Raphael Ngorongo Wangui

Respondent

Veronicah Wanjiru Wangui

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to extension of time to file and serve the notice of appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether refiling the same application before a different single judge after dismissal constitutes abuse of court process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicants, having had their application for extension of time dismissed by a single judge for lack of jurisdiction, could not refile the same application before another single judge. The proper procedure was to seek reference to the full court under Rule 57 of the Court of Appeal Rules. The attempt to relitigate the same issue before a different judge amounted to abuse of the court process. Consequently, the application was found to be devoid of merit and was dismissed with costs to the respondents.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondents

Orders

  • The application for extension of time to file and serve the notice of appeal out of time is dismissed.
  • The applicants shall pay the costs of the application to the respondents.