[2013] KEHC 3159 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 3159 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had sufficiently explained the delay in filing the appeal, as the proceedings were not supplied until 15th June 2012 and a certificate of delay was issued on 21st June 2012. The application for extension was filed promptly thereafter on 3rd July 2012. The court held that the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 3159 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Umoja Services Station Ltd; Respondent: Evans Mochumbe Gwaro
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Miscellaneous Application 97 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals From Subordinate Courts, Certificate of Delay, Discretionary Powers, Stay of Execution
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals From Subordinate Courts Certificate of Delay Discretionary Powers Stay of Execution

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Umoja Services Station Ltd

Applicant

Evans Mochumbe Gwaro

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to extend time for filing the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had sufficiently explained the delay in filing the appeal, as the proceedings were not supplied until 15th June 2012 and a certificate of delay was issued on 21st June 2012. The application for extension was filed promptly thereafter on 3rd July 2012. The court held that the intended appeal was arguable and that no prejudice would be suffered by the respondent if the extension was granted, especially since a stay of execution had already been granted. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion under section 79(G) of the Civil Procedure Act to allow the application and extend the time for filing the appeal.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Time for filing the appeal is extended.
  • The appeal shall be filed and served within 14 days from the date of the ruling.