[1999] KECA 105 (KLR)

[1999] KECA 105 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants had demonstrated problems in obtaining documents from the registry of the superior court, which constituted sufficient cause for the delay. Exercising its discretion, the court allowed the application as prayed in the second prayer, deeming the notice of appeal filed on 14th...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1999] KECA 105 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Samson Mwakitindi Ismail S. Yusuf; Applicant: I.S. Yusuf Transporters; Respondent: Eric Isayi Shalinga (an infant suing by his next friend Mary Shamte); Respondent: Arvey E. Robins and the Uniton National Bank of Pittsburg (both suing as Co-executors of the Estates of Burton L. Rapport and Giesela L. Rapport); Respondent: Zablon Changawa; Respondent: Angwarali & Brothers
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 313 of 1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve Notice of Appeal and Record of Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
Application allowed. Extension of time granted.
Judges
AB Shah
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Filing Requirements
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Process Filing Requirements

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

Samson Mwakitindi Ismail S. Yusuf

Applicant

I.S. Yusuf Transporters

Applicant

Eric Isayi Shalinga (an infant suing by his next friend Mary Shamte)

Respondent

Arvey E. Robins and the Uniton National Bank of Pittsburg (both suing as Co-executors of the Estates of Burton L. Rapport and Giesela L. Rapport)

Respondent

Zablon Changawa

Respondent

Angwarali & Brothers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be granted an extension of time to file and serve the notice of appeal and record of appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether difficulties in obtaining documents from the registry constitute sufficient cause for extension.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had demonstrated problems in obtaining documents from the registry of the superior court, which constituted sufficient cause for the delay. Exercising its discretion, the court allowed the application as prayed in the second prayer, deeming the notice of appeal filed on 14th November 1997 to be filed in time and granting 30 days from the date of the ruling to lodge the record of appeal. The court also ordered that the first and second respondents have the costs of the application in any event.

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Extension of time granted.

Orders

  • The notice of appeal filed on 14th November 1997 is deemed to be filed in time.
  • The record of appeal shall be lodged within 30 days of the date of this ruling.