[2016] KEHC 1484 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 1484 (KLR)

The court found that the decree appealed against was passed on 11/09/2014, and the statutory 30-day period for filing an appeal would have expired on 11/10/2014, which was a Saturday. Applying the principle that if the last day falls on a non-working day, the next working day is the effective deadline, the appellant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEHC 1484 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Stephen Ngugi Kinuthia; Respondent: David Peter Owuor
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Murang'a
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 76 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/application to Strike Out Appeal as Out of Time
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the appellant
Judges
DW Mbuteti
Legal Topics
Appeal Timelines, Leave to Appeal, Computation of Time
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Appeal Timelines Leave to Appeal Computation of Time

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Ngugi Kinuthia

Appellant

David Peter Owuor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/application to Strike Out Appeal as Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the appeal was lodged out of time contrary to section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act.
  2. 2 Whether leave of court was required to file the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether payment of the decretal sum compromises the right of appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the decree appealed against was passed on 11/09/2014, and the statutory 30-day period for filing an appeal would have expired on 11/10/2014, which was a Saturday. Applying the principle that if the last day falls on a non-working day, the next working day is the effective deadline, the appellant had until 13/10/2014 to file the appeal. The appellant actually lodged the appeal on 10/10/2014, which was within the prescribed period. Therefore, the respondent's application to strike out the appeal for being out of time was based on an erroneous understanding of the facts and the law. The court also clarified that payment of the decretal sum does not compromise the...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the appellant

Orders

  • The respondent's application dated 10/02/2016 is dismissed with costs to the appellant.