[2019] KEELC 1319 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 1319 (KLR)

The court found that although there was a delay of approximately two and a half months in filing the application for extension of time to appeal, the delay was sufficiently explained as being due to the mistake of the applicants' counsel. The court held that such a mistake should not be visited upon the client, and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 1319 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Samwel Ambasa; Applicant: Charles Ambasa; Applicant: Nebart Ambasa; Applicant: Sella Ambasa; Respondent: Stella Ingasia
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Migori
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 7 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Stay of Execution
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
GMA Ongondo
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Stay of Execution, Appeals From Subordinate Courts, Mistake of Counsel, Right to Fair Hearing
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Stay of Execution Appeals From Subordinate Courts Mistake of Counsel Right to Fair Hearing

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samwel Ambasa

Applicant

Charles Ambasa

Applicant

Nebart Ambasa

Applicant

Sella Ambasa

Applicant

Stella Ingasia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time to file an appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to a stay of execution of the judgment and decree pending appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in filing the appeal was excusable due to mistake of counsel.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although there was a delay of approximately two and a half months in filing the application for extension of time to appeal, the delay was sufficiently explained as being due to the mistake of the applicants' counsel. The court held that such a mistake should not be visited upon the client, and that the applicants had demonstrated sufficient cause for the extension. The court also recognized the applicants' right to a fair hearing and to be heard on appeal. Further, the court noted that the subject matter of the intended appeal was land, and that it had the authority to preserve the subject matter pending appeal. Consequently, the court allowed the application for...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Time is enlarged for the applicants to file an appeal out of time against the judgment and decree in Kehancha PMCC No. 12 of 2015.
  • Stay of execution of the judgment and decree in Kehancha PMCC No. 12 of 2015 is granted pending hearing and determination of the appeal.