[2022] KEHC 2962 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's failure to file the substantive judicial review application within the prescribed time was due to a genuine mistaken belief and lack of proper notice, compounded by the communication and filing challenges during the Covid pandemic. The court took judicial notice of these...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2962 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Victor Juma Owiti; Respondent: Director Of Pensions
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application 110 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Enlarge Time for Filing Substantive Motion
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- AK Ndung'u
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review Procedure, Enlargement of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
- 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
Victor Juma Owiti
Applicant
Director Of Pensions
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Enlarge Time for Filing Substantive Motion
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should enlarge time for filing the substantive judicial review application after expiry of the initial period granted by the court.
- 2 Whether the applicant's explanation for delay constitutes sufficient cause to warrant exercise of the court's discretion.
- 3 Whether the respondent would suffer prejudice if time is enlarged.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's failure to file the substantive judicial review application within the prescribed time was due to a genuine mistaken belief and lack of proper notice, compounded by the communication and filing challenges during the Covid pandemic. The court took judicial notice of these challenges and held that the explanation provided was sufficient cause to warrant the exercise of its discretion to enlarge time. The court further noted that no prejudice would be suffered by the respondent, who did not oppose the application. In promoting substantive justice and considering the nature of the rights sought to be enforced, the court allowed the application to enlarge...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The application dated 8th October, 2021 is allowed in terms of prayer 2.
- The substantive motion be taken out and served within the next 14 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Owiti v Director Of Pensions (Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application 110 of 2021) [2022] KEHC 2962 (KLR) (Judicial Review) (9 June 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 2962 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Judicial Review
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application 110 of 2021
AK Ndung'u, J
June 9, 2022
Between
Victor Juma Owiti
Applicant
and
Director Of Pensions
Respondent
Ruling
1. The application before court is dated 8th October, 2021. It seeks orders:i.Spentii.That the Honourable Court be pleased to enlarge time for the filing of substantive application in respect of Leave granted vide the order dated 19th July 2021 to enable the Applicant file the substantive application.iii.That [in the alternative, and without prejudice to prayer 2 above,] the Honourable Court be pleased to deem the draft substantive application annexed to the Affidavit in support hereof as having been duly filed within time
2. It is premised on 5 grounds viz:i.That on the said 8th October 2021, I attended court with the mistaken belief that JR Misc. EIIO of 2021 was coming for mention for directions on the Application for Leave only to learn from the learned Judge that the prayer for Leave therein had already been granted on the 19th July 2021. ii.That the learned Judge had in granting the said Leave ex parte as prayed directed that the substantive Application be filed within 14 days from the said 19th July 2021. iii.That as a result of the mistaken belief, and the lack of proper notice on the orders of 19th July 2021, it is necessary to have the time enlarged for the filing of the said substantive application as the fourteen (14) days allowed had elapsed.iv.That neither the Respondent nor the Interested Party would suffer any prejudice should the Honorable Court enlarge time for the filing, or were the Honorable Court deem the draft substantive application to have been duly filed within time.v.That it is in the interest of substantive justice for this Honorable Court to allow this application, and to enlarge time for the filing of, and or deem the substantive application to have been duly filed within time.
3. The application is further supported by the affidavit of Victor Juma Owiti (hereinafter, the applicant sworn on 8th October, 2021.
4. No response was filed to the application.
5. I have considered the application. I note that the ex parte chamber summons was filed at the height of the Covid pandemic. I take judicial notice of the communication and filing challenges that affected not only the court users but the court itself.
6. The power to enlarge time is discretionary. Like all discretionary powers it must be exercised judiciously.
7. Having considered the explanation given and noting the nature of rights sought to be enforced and inclined to promote substantive justice in the matter, I am persuaded that the orders sought are merited.
8. I accordingly allow the application dated 8th October, 2021 in terms of prayer 2 and make the following directions:1. The substantive motion be taken out and served within the next 14 days.2. Responses be filed within 14 days of service.3. Mention on 6th July, 2022 for directions on hearing.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 9THDAY OF JUNE 2022. ……………………………………..A.K. NDUNGUJUDGE