[2020] KECA 258 (KLR)

[2020] KECA 258 (KLR)

The court found that the delay in filing the record of appeal was not inordinate, as the applicant had demonstrated that the proceedings from the lower court were supplied late and that the notice of appeal was filed on time. The court exercised its discretion in favour of the applicant, holding that the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KECA 258 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Springboard Capital Limited; Respondent: Josphat Kihia Ngugi; Respondent: Joyce Wanjiku Ngugi; Respondent: George Njuguna Njoroge; Respondent: Land Registrar, Kiambu
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal (Application) 286 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve Record of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
S ole Kantai
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Service of Notice, Interlocutory Injunctions
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Appeal Procedure Service of Notice Interlocutory Injunctions

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

Springboard Capital Limited

Applicant

Josphat Kihia Ngugi

Respondent

Joyce Wanjiku Ngugi

Respondent

George Njuguna Njoroge

Respondent

Land Registrar, Kiambu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted extension of time to file and serve the record of appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the record of appeal was inordinate or excusable.
  3. 3 Whether the intended appeal is arguable and not frivolous.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay in filing the record of appeal was not inordinate, as the applicant had demonstrated that the proceedings from the lower court were supplied late and that the notice of appeal was filed on time. The court exercised its discretion in favour of the applicant, holding that the circumstances justified the extension of time. The competence of the appeal and any procedural objections could be raised by the respondents in accordance with the rules of the Court. The application for extension of time was therefore allowed, with directions for service and filing of the necessary documents within specified timelines.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant shall serve notice of appeal within 7 days of the ruling.
  • The applicant shall file the record of appeal within 30 days thereafter.