[2005] KEHC 2025 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had sufficiently explained the delay in filing the appeal, which was caused by a genuine mistake regarding the need for leave. The applicant acted promptly upon realizing the error, and there was no evidence of prejudice to the respondent. The court emphasized that the applicant...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2005] KEHC 2025 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Veronica Wanjiku Kaguma; Respondent: Peter Karani Mutonyi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 869 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to File Appeal Out of Time
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Leave to file appeal out of time granted.
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeals From Subordinate Courts, Ex Parte Judgment, Good and Sufficient Cause
- 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
Veronica Wanjiku Kaguma
Appellant
Peter Karani Mutonyi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to File Appeal Out of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated good and sufficient cause for failing to file the appeal within the prescribed time.
- 2 Whether leave to file the appeal out of time should be granted under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had sufficiently explained the delay in filing the appeal, which was caused by a genuine mistake regarding the need for leave. The applicant acted promptly upon realizing the error, and there was no evidence of prejudice to the respondent. The court emphasized that the applicant had not been heard on the merits, and justice required that she be given an opportunity to pursue her appeal. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act to allow the application for extension of time.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Leave to file appeal out of time granted.
Orders
- Prayer 2 of the application dated 7th July, 2004 is allowed.
- The Memorandum of Appeal shall be filed and served within the next 7 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 869 of 2004
VERONICA WANJIKU KAGUMA ……………...………. APPELLANT VERSUS PETER KARANI MUTONYI …………………..……… RESPONDENT
RULING
This is an application for leave to file appeal out of time under Section 79 G of the Civil Procedure Act.
That Section states as follows:
“Every appeal from a subordinate court to the High Court shall be filed within a period of thirty days from the date of the decree or order appealed against, excluding from such period any time which the lower court may certify as having been requisite for the preparation and delivery to the Appellant of a copy of the decree or order:
Provided that an appeal may be admitted out of time if the appellant satisfies the court that he had good and sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time.”
Judgment was delivered ex parte in this case on 25th October, 2002, and the Appellant promptly filed the Memorandum of Appeal on 21st November, 2002 within the time allowed under the law. However, the appeal was withdrawn in the mistaken belief that leave to file appeal was required, and had not been obtained. It was only when the application for leave was disallowed on 25th June, 2004, that the Appellant realized the mistake, and promptly thereafter filed this application.
In my view, the Applicant here has explained the delay sufficiently well, the same is excusable, and should, therefore, not be shut out of the seat of justice without being heard. I note that the Judgment here having been entered ex parte the Applicant has not been heard. The Applicant has shown seriousness by preparing and filing the Record of Appeal. She has an arguable appeal, and the Respondent has not shown what prejudice he will suffer if this application were allowed.
Accordingly, I allow prayer 2 of the application dated 7th July, 2004 and order that the Memorandum of Appeal be filed and served within the next 7 days.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 8th day of August, 2005.
ALNASHIR VISRAM
JUDGE