[2023] KEHC 24640 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 24640 (KLR)

The court found that while the applicant's explanation for the delay in filing the appeal was not entirely satisfactory—since the memorandum of appeal could have been filed within the prescribed period and the delay in obtaining typed proceedings was not a sufficient reason—the constitutional right of access to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 24640 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Jackline Wanjira Nthiga; Respondent: Francis Ndwiga Nyaga
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Embu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application E016 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
LM Njuguna
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Extension of Time, Appeals From Subordinate Courts, Computation of Time, Access to Justice
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Out of Time Extension of Time Appeals From Subordinate Courts Computation of Time Access to Justice

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jackline Wanjira Nthiga

Applicant

Francis Ndwiga Nyaga

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient cause for delay to warrant leave to appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal was adequately explained.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent would suffer prejudice if leave is granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while the applicant's explanation for the delay in filing the appeal was not entirely satisfactory—since the memorandum of appeal could have been filed within the prescribed period and the delay in obtaining typed proceedings was not a sufficient reason—the constitutional right of access to justice and the need to allow parties to ventilate their grievances fully weighed in favour of granting leave. The court exercised its discretion to allow the application, emphasizing that justice should not be denied on technical grounds where no substantial prejudice would be caused to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to file appeal out of time.
  • The appeal to be filed within 14 days from the date of this ruling.