[2024] KECA 650 (KLR)
The court found that, despite the applicant's explanation for the delay in serving the Notice of Appeal and letter bespeaking proceedings, the application was not prosecuted as neither the respondents filed a response nor were written submissions presented by any party. The court determined that, in the absence of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KECA 650 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Ian David Oloo (Suing as Administrator of the Estate of John Bruno Oloo); Respondent: Registered Trustees Trinity Fellowship; Respondent: National Land Commission
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application E022 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
- Outcome
- application dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- HA Omondi
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Service of Notice, Appeals Process
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ian David Oloo (Suing as Administrator of the Estate of John Bruno Oloo)
Applicant
Registered Trustees Trinity Fellowship
Respondent
National Land Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to serve the Notice of Appeal and letter bespeaking proceedings.
- 2 Whether the delay in service was excusable under the circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, despite the applicant's explanation for the delay in serving the Notice of Appeal and letter bespeaking proceedings, the application was not prosecuted as neither the respondents filed a response nor were written submissions presented by any party. The court determined that, in the absence of prosecution, the application could not be entertained and was therefore dismissed for want of prosecution. No costs were awarded.
Court Disposition
application dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The application dated 16th February 2024 is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Oloo ((Suing as Administrator of the Estate of John Bruno Oloo)) v Registered Trustees Trinity Fellowship & another (Civil Application E022 of 2024) [2024] KECA 650 (KLR) (7 June 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KECA 650 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Court of Appeal at Kisumu
Civil Application E022 of 2024
HA Omondi, JA
June 7, 2024
Between
Ian David Oloo
Applicant
(Suing as Administrator of the Estate of John Bruno Oloo)
and
Registered Trustees Trinity Fellowship
1st Respondent
National Land Commission
2nd Respondent
(Being an application seeking extension of time limited to serve a Notice of Appeal and a letter bespeaking proceedings from the judgment and decree of the Environment and Land Court at Kisumu (E. Asati, J.) dated 7th December 2023inELC Case 325 of 2017)
Ruling
1. The application before this Court dated 16th February 2024 brought pursuant to rule 4 Court of Appeal Rules, 2022; and Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution of Kenya, is seeking that time within which the applicant was required serve the Notice of Appeal and letter bespeaking typed proceedings, both dated 13th of December 2023, be extended; and that once this order is granted, then the two documents which were served on the respondents on 2nd February 2024, be deemed as properly filed.
2. According to the applicant, he had filed a suit in ELC No. 325 of 2017 against the respondents, and being aggrieved by the outcome delivered on 7th December 2023 (Asati, J.), a notice of appeal and letters bespeaking the proceedings, both dated 13th December 2023, were filed within time. However, it was not until 31st January 2024, that the Notice was endorsed by the Kisumu, Deputy Registrar of the Environment and Land Court as having been properly lodged; and on 2nd February 2024, the said documents were served on the respondents.
3. It is explained that the delay in service of the documents was due to the fact that counsel’s office remained closed for the December holidays; and only resumed on 15th January, when upon a follow up on the status of the matter revealed the non- action, and eventually counsel obtained an endorsed copy on 2nd February 2024.
4. The applicant urges this Court to find that the delay was minimal, inadvertent, and was not intended to obstruct justice; and the applicant was diligent in ensuring thatservice of the two documents was effected immediately, albeit out of time; and no loss or prejudice will be occasioned in granting the prayer.
5. There was no response filed by the respondents; and neither of the parties filed written submissions, so that for all practical purposes, the application remains unprosecuted. In what was otherwise a well explained situation, the application is dismissed for want of prosecution. I award no costs.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 7TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024. H. A. OMONDI............................................JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a true copy of the original.SignedDEPUTY REGISTRAR