[2022] KECA 1376 (KLR)

[2022] KECA 1376 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant's delay of approximately eighteen days in filing the Notice of Appeal was satisfactorily explained by the lack of notice regarding the changed date of delivery of the ruling and the subsequent prompt action upon discovery. The court accepted the applicant's evidence of the steps...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KECA 1376 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Pamwhite Limited; Respondent: Benson Karomo & Hubert Seinfert (Suing as the Chairman and Secretary respectively of New Nyali Residents Association); Respondent: Ideal Locations Limited; Respondent: Kirke Limited; Respondent: Conrad Properties; Respondent: The County Government of Mombasa
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application E047 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve Notice of Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed. Leave granted to file and serve Notice of Appeal out of time. Notice of Appeal deemed properly filed and served. No order as to costs.
Judges
P Nyamweya
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Notice of Appeal, Court of Appeal Rules, Delay Explanation, Jurisdiction of Elc
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Notice of Appeal Court of Appeal Rules Delay Explanation Jurisdiction of Elc

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pamwhite Limited

Applicant

Benson Karomo & Hubert Seinfert (Suing as the Chairman and Secretary respectively of New Nyali Residents Association)

Respondent

Ideal Locations Limited

Respondent

Kirke Limited

Respondent

Conrad Properties

Respondent

The County Government of Mombasa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient reason for the delay in filing and serving the Notice of Appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the Notice of Appeal is excusable and not inordinate.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has demonstrated plausible grounds of appeal to warrant extension of time.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's delay of approximately eighteen days in filing the Notice of Appeal was satisfactorily explained by the lack of notice regarding the changed date of delivery of the ruling and the subsequent prompt action upon discovery. The court accepted the applicant's evidence of the steps taken and found the delay excusable and not inordinate. Additionally, the applicant demonstrated plausible grounds of appeal, particularly regarding the jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court to hear an objection to development permission in the first instance. As the application was unopposed and the applicant met the criteria for extension of time, the court exercised...

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Leave granted to file and serve Notice of Appeal out of time. Notice of Appeal deemed properly filed and served. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to file and serve the Notice of Appeal dated June 6, 2022 and lodged on June 7, 2022 out of time.
  • The said Notice of Appeal is deemed to have been properly filed and served.