[2008] KEHC 2000 (KLR)

[2008] KEHC 2000 (KLR)

The court found that the Attorney-General had satisfactorily explained the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal out of time, as the proceedings were supplied late and a certificate of delay was issued. The application was properly brought as a miscellaneous criminal application, and there was no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] KEHC 2000 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Thomas Amenya Ontita
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisii
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 83 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
DK Musinga
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Certificate of Delay, Criminal Appeals, Procedural Timelines
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Out of Time Certificate of Delay Criminal Appeals Procedural Timelines

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Thomas Amenya Ontita

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the Attorney-General should be granted leave to file an appeal out of time under section 349 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
  2. 2 Whether there was inordinate delay in bringing the application for leave to appeal out of time.
  3. 3 Whether the application was procedurally proper given the manner in which it was brought.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Attorney-General had satisfactorily explained the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal out of time, as the proceedings were supplied late and a certificate of delay was issued. The application was properly brought as a miscellaneous criminal application, and there was no procedural impropriety. The court held that the intended appeal was arguable and that it was in the interest of justice to allow the Attorney-General to file the appeal out of time. Accordingly, the application was allowed and leave was granted to file the appeal within fourteen days.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The Attorney-General is granted leave to file the intended appeal out of time.
  • The intended appeal must be filed within fourteen days from the date of this ruling.