[2020] KESC 2 (KLR)

[2020] KESC 2 (KLR)

The Supreme Court exercised its discretion to grant leave for the appellants to file a supplementary record of appeal out of time. The Court found that the omission of the relevant documents was adequately explained as inadvertent and occasioned by urgency. The documents sought to be introduced were already part of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KESC 2 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Surya Holdings Limited; Appellant: Rhea Holdings Limited; Appellant: Karuturi Limited; Respondent: CFC Stanbic Limited; Respondent: Muniu Thoithi and Kuria Mucheru (Joint Receivers and Managers of Karuturi Limited)
Court
Supreme Court
Court Station
Supreme Court of Kenya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 8 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Supplementary Record of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
PM Mwilu, MK Ibrahim, SC Wanjala, NS Ndungu, I Lenaola
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Supplementary Record of Appeal, Court Discretion, Procedural Compliance
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Supplementary Record of Appeal Court Discretion Procedural Compliance

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

Surya Holdings Limited

Appellant

Rhea Holdings Limited

Appellant

Karuturi Limited

Appellant

CFC Stanbic Limited

Respondent

Muniu Thoithi and Kuria Mucheru (Joint Receivers and Managers of Karuturi Limited)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Supplementary Record of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the appellants should be granted leave to file a supplementary record of appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the omission of documents from the record of appeal was sufficiently explained and non-prejudicial.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court exercised its discretion to grant leave for the appellants to file a supplementary record of appeal out of time. The Court found that the omission of the relevant documents was adequately explained as inadvertent and occasioned by urgency. The documents sought to be introduced were already part of the proceedings at the Court of Appeal and were central to the appeal. Both parties agreed to the necessity of including these documents, and the respondents did not oppose the application. The Court was satisfied that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents and that granting the application would facilitate the just and expeditious determination of the appeal....

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Leave granted to the appellants to file a Supplementary Record of Appeal containing the specified documents.
  • The Supplementary Record of Appeal to be filed within seven (7) days from the date of the ruling.