[2008] KEHC 3809 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had provided a reasonable and adequately supported explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, as evidenced by the certificate of delay. The memorandum of appeal demonstrated that the appeal was arguable. The applicant had also deposited a sum sufficient to cover the decretal...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2008] KEHC 3809 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Stephen Matheka; Respondent: Thuku Macharia
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 304 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Stay of Execution
- Outcome
- application allowed with conditions
- Judges
- GG Okwengu
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Stay of Execution, Appeals Process
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Stephen Matheka
Applicant
Thuku Macharia
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Stay of Execution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to file an appeal out of time.
- 2 Whether the memorandum of appeal already filed should be deemed properly filed.
- 3 Whether an order for stay of execution pending appeal should be granted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had provided a reasonable and adequately supported explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, as evidenced by the certificate of delay. The memorandum of appeal demonstrated that the appeal was arguable. The applicant had also deposited a sum sufficient to cover the decretal amount, satisfying the requirement for security. In balancing the interests of both parties, the court determined it was fair to grant leave to file the appeal out of time, deem the memorandum of appeal properly filed, and issue a conditional stay of execution pending appeal, with the deposited funds to be held in a joint interest-earning account.
Court Disposition
application allowed with conditions
Orders
- Leave granted to the applicant to file the appeal out of time; the memorandum of appeal filed on 10th June, 2008 is deemed properly filed.
- An order of stay of execution pending appeal is issued on condition that the amount deposited in court is released to the parties' advocates to be deposited in an interest earning account in the joint names of the parties' advocates within 15 days from the date of release.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)
Civil Appeal 304 of 2008
STEPHEN MATHEKA...…….……………….….. APPLICANT
VERSUS
THUKU MACHARIA…………………………..RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
By a notice of motion dated 31st July, 2005, Stephen Matheka the applicant has come to this court under Section 79G, Section, 63(e), and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, and Order XLI rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking inter alia, orders for leave to file the memorandum of appeal out of time and to have the memorandum of appeal already filed deemed as properly filed.
The applicant also seeks orders for stay of execution pending the hearing and determination of the appeal. The applicant explains that he was not able to file his appeal in court within time as he was only supplied with certified copies of proceedings and judgment after the time for filing the appeal had lapsed. The applicant further contends that his advocate was not personally present in court at the time when the judgment was delivered and the advocate who was holding his brief did not record the findings of the trial magistrate, hence the need for the certified copies of proceedings and judgment. The applicant also maintains that his appeal has high chances of success. The applicant has exhibited a copy of the memorandum of appeal and a certificate of delay from the lower court showing that the time taken for preparation and delivery of the certified copy of the ruling was from 7th December, 2007 to 19th May, 2008. The applicant has also deposited a sum of Kshs.192,899/= in accordance with the order which was made by this court on 11th July, 2008.
The application is opposed by the respondent Thuku Macharia who has sworn a replying affidavit contending that the application is fatally defective. The respondent maintains that the applicant has not given any good explanation for the delay in filing the memorandum of appeal. It is further contended that there is no competent appeal before the court and that the security offered by the applicant is inadequate.
I have carefully considered this application. The applicant has given a reasonable explanation for his delay in filing the appeal. That explanation has been supported by a certificate of delay which was exhibited. It is also apparent from the memorandum of appeal exhibited that the applicant has an arguable appeal. It is therefore only fair that he be given an opportunity to have his day in court.
Accordingly, I grant the applicant leave to file his appeal out of time and order that the memorandum of appeal filed on 10th June, 2008 be deemed as properly filed.
As regards the application for stay of execution pending appeal, the applicant has deposited in court a total sum of Kshs.192,899/= which is sufficient to cover the decretal sum. In the circumstances, it is appropriate that an order of stay of execution do issue to enable the applicant pursue his appeal. Nevertheless, it is necessary to take into account the interest of the respondent. I will therefore make the following orders: -
(i) Leave be and is hereby granted to the applicant to file his appeal out of time and the memorandum of appeal filed on 10th June, 2008 be and is hereby deemed properly filed.
(ii) An order of stay of execution pending appeal shall issue on condition that the amount deposited in court shall be released to the parties’ advocates to be deposited into an interest earning account in the joint names of the parties’ advocates within 15 days from the date of release.
(iii) The applicant shall file a record of appeal within four months from the date hereof and take all necessary action to facilitate the speedy disposal of the appeal.
Dated and delivered this 14th day of October, 2008
H. M. OKWENGU
JUDGE
In the presence of: -
Mutheu H/B for Muya for the applicant
Muruka for the respondent