[2021] KECA 401 (KLR)

[2021] KECA 401 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants had provided a satisfactory and well-documented explanation for the delay in filing the memorandum and record of appeal, namely, the abandonment by their previous counsel and the subsequent difficulties in reconstructing the case file. The court was satisfied that the delay was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KECA 401 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Sospeter Njuki Kagundu; Applicant: Rachel M. Kagundu; Applicant: Ngurungu Muthoke; Respondent: Nicholas Nguthi Kivinda; Respondent: Mutunyi Kiveo Nguthi; Respondent: Stanley Njiru Kiura
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 41 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Memorandum and Record of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
AK Murgor
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Filing Deadlines, Judicial Discretion, Delay Explanation
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeal Filing Deadlines Judicial Discretion Delay Explanation

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sospeter Njuki Kagundu

Applicant

Rachel M. Kagundu

Applicant

Ngurungu Muthoke

Applicant

Nicholas Nguthi Kivinda

Respondent

Mutunyi Kiveo Nguthi

Respondent

Stanley Njiru Kiura

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Extension of Time Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Memorandum and Record of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have provided sufficient explanation for the delay in filing the memorandum and record of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to extend time for filing the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents would suffer prejudice if the extension is granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had provided a satisfactory and well-documented explanation for the delay in filing the memorandum and record of appeal, namely, the abandonment by their previous counsel and the subsequent difficulties in reconstructing the case file. The court was satisfied that the delay was not inordinate and that no prejudice would be occasioned to the respondents if the extension was granted. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules to allow the application for extension of time, granting the applicants 21 days from the date of the ruling to file and serve the necessary documents. The issue of the prospects of...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Extension of time granted to file and serve the Record and Memorandum of appeal within 21 days from the date of the ruling.
  • Costs of the application shall abide by the outcome of the intended appeal.