[2019] KEELC 3997 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 3997 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a truthful and satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the notice of appeal. The applicant's request for a copy of the judgment was filed almost a month after judgment was delivered, and he received the judgment five days after making the request. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 3997 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Obadiah Peter Kairaria; Respondent: Anderson Gitonga Justace; Respondent: Cecilia Churi Salesio; Respondent: Rorland Kimathi Kanga
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Chuka
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 79 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Extend Time to File Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Notice of Appeal, Judicial Discretion, Delay in Filing, Truthfulness of Applicant
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Notice of Appeal Judicial Discretion Delay in Filing Truthfulness of Applicant

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Obadiah Peter Kairaria

Applicant

Anderson Gitonga Justace

Respondent

Cecilia Churi Salesio

Respondent

Rorland Kimathi Kanga

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Extend Time to File Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient cause for extension of time to file a notice of appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the notice of appeal was occasioned by the court or by the applicant.
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a truthful and satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the notice of appeal. The applicant's request for a copy of the judgment was filed almost a month after judgment was delivered, and he received the judgment five days after making the request. The court determined that the delay was not attributable to the court but to the applicant's own lack of diligence. The court was not persuaded that the applicant was a truthful litigant or that sufficient cause had been shown to warrant the exercise of judicial discretion in his favour. Consequently, the application for extension of time to file a notice of appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for extension of time to file and serve notice of appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.