[2021] KEHC 6640 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 6640 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant's delay in filing the memorandum of appeal was minimal and satisfactorily explained by the challenges with the judiciary's e-filing system, which affected the entire country. Although an alternative email address was provided for urgent filings, there was no evidence the applicant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 6640 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: SNM; Respondent: Sub County Children’s Officer; Respondent: PNN
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application 6 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
JO Nyarangi
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Custody of Children, Guardianship Disputes, Extension of Time, Appeals From Subordinate Courts
Source Language
en
Family and Children Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Out of Time Custody of Children Guardianship Disputes Extension of Time Appeals From Subordinate Courts

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SNM

Applicant

Sub County Children’s Officer

Respondent

PNN

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient cause to warrant extension of time to file an appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal was inordinate or excusable.
  3. 3 Whether granting leave to appeal out of time would prejudice the respondents.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's delay in filing the memorandum of appeal was minimal and satisfactorily explained by the challenges with the judiciary's e-filing system, which affected the entire country. Although an alternative email address was provided for urgent filings, there was no evidence the applicant attempted to use it, but the court did not find this omission fatal. The delay was not inordinate, and the applicant's right to appeal should not be denied on this basis. The intended appeal was not frivolous, and no prejudice to the respondents was demonstrated. Therefore, the court exercised its discretion to grant leave to appeal out of time, deeming the memorandum of appeal...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Leave to file appeal out of time is granted.
  • The memorandum of appeal filed is deemed as duly filed.