[2018] KEHC 9939 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 9939 (KLR)

The court found that the delay of eight days in filing the appeal was not inordinate and was satisfactorily explained by the applicant as resulting from the ruling being delivered in the absence of the parties and an inadvertent mistake by counsel. Applying the principles for extension of time as set out by the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 9939 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Ravleen Kaur Sagoo; Respondent: Sagar Builders Limited; Respondent: James K. Ndung'u
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Miscellaneous Application 357 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay of Proceedings
Outcome
application allowed with conditions
Judges
BT Jaden
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals From Subordinate Courts, Stay of Proceedings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals From Subordinate Courts Stay of Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ravleen Kaur Sagoo

Applicant

Sagar Builders Limited

Respondent

James K. Ndung'u

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay of Proceedings

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established sufficient cause for extension of time to file an appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether a stay of proceedings pending appeal should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay of eight days in filing the appeal was not inordinate and was satisfactorily explained by the applicant as resulting from the ruling being delivered in the absence of the parties and an inadvertent mistake by counsel. Applying the principles for extension of time as set out by the Supreme Court in Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat v IEBC & 7 others, the court exercised its discretion to allow the application for extension of time. The court further ordered that the appeal be filed and served within seven days and fixed for directions within ninety days, failing which the application would stand dismissed. The court did not specifically address the stay of...

Court Disposition

application allowed with conditions

Orders

  • The applicant is granted extension of time to file and serve the memorandum of appeal within seven days.
  • The appeal must be fixed for directions within ninety days from the date of the ruling.