[2002] KECA 129 (KLR)

[2002] KECA 129 (KLR)

The court exercised its discretion under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules to grant the applicant an extension of time to serve the record of appeal. The judge found that the applicant should not be punished for the errors of his advocates, particularly as there was no evidence of inactivity or lack of diligence...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] KECA 129 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Peter Ndirangu; Respondent: Mary Karanja
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 314 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to Serve Record of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
AB Shah
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Filing Requirements, Record of Appeal Service
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeal Filing Requirements Record of Appeal Service

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Ndirangu

Applicant

Mary Karanja

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to Serve Record of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to serve the record of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether errors or delays by the applicant's advocates should be visited upon the applicant.
  3. 3 Whether the appeal is frivolous or has merit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules to grant the applicant an extension of time to serve the record of appeal. The judge found that the applicant should not be punished for the errors of his advocates, particularly as there was no evidence of inactivity or lack of diligence on the applicant's part. The court also noted that the appeal had already been lodged and was not frivolous. Accordingly, the application was allowed, and the appeal was deemed to have been filed in time, subject to the applicant filing a supplementary record of appeal within seven days to include a copy of the ruling.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Civil Appeal No. 226 of 2001 lodged on 30th August, 2001 is deemed to be filed in time.
  • The applicant shall file within the next seven days a supplementary record of appeal to include a copy of this ruling.