[2022] KECA 1388 (KLR)

[2022] KECA 1388 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent had failed to take any steps to prosecute the intended appeal for over three years after filing the notice of appeal, despite the proceedings being ready. The applicant's delay in bringing the present application was not comparable to the respondent's prolonged inaction. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KECA 1388 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Gidraf Njoroge Thigah; Respondent: Borderless Tracking Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application E046 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to File Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
SG Kairu
Legal Topics
Leave to File Application, Striking Out Notice of Appeal, Delay in Prosecution, Court of Appeal Rules, Unfair Termination, Elrc Judgment Enforcement
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Employment and Labour Leave to File Application Striking Out Notice of Appeal Delay in Prosecution Court of Appeal Rules Unfair Termination Elrc Judgment Enforcement

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gidraf Njoroge Thigah

Applicant

Borderless Tracking Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to File Application to Strike Out Notice of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to file an application to strike out the notice of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's delay in prosecuting the intended appeal justifies granting leave.
  3. 3 Whether the delay by the applicant in bringing the present application is excusable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent had failed to take any steps to prosecute the intended appeal for over three years after filing the notice of appeal, despite the proceedings being ready. The applicant's delay in bringing the present application was not comparable to the respondent's prolonged inaction. The relevant consideration was the respondent's failure to act, which justified the exercise of the court's discretion to grant leave. Accordingly, the court allowed the application, granting the applicant leave to file and serve an application to strike out the notice of appeal within 21 days.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to file and serve an application for striking out the notice of appeal within 21 days from the date of delivery of this ruling.
  • No orders as to costs.