[2022] KEELC 3394 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 3394 (KLR)

The court found that, although it was the appellants' word against the 2nd respondent's regarding knowledge of the judgment, the absence of the lower court file and the explanation provided by the appellants justified the exercise of discretion in their favour. The court granted leave to file the appeal out of time,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELC 3394 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Joseph Mwangi Wanjohi; Appellant: Nancy Nyambura Mwangi; Respondent: City Council of Nairobi; Respondent: Paul John Kimani
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal 089 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Stay of Execution
Outcome
Application partially allowed.
Judges
LC Komingoi
Legal Topics
Extension of Time to Appeal, Stay of Execution, Right to Be Heard, Appeals Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time to Appeal Stay of Execution Right to Be Heard Appeals Process

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Mwangi Wanjohi

Appellant

Nancy Nyambura Mwangi

Appellant

City Council of Nairobi

Respondent

Paul John Kimani

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Stay of Execution

  1. 1 Whether the appellants should be granted leave to file an appeal out of time against the judgment delivered on July 30, 2021.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants have met the requirements for a stay of execution pending appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, although it was the appellants' word against the 2nd respondent's regarding knowledge of the judgment, the absence of the lower court file and the explanation provided by the appellants justified the exercise of discretion in their favour. The court granted leave to file the appeal out of time, recognizing the constitutional right to be heard. However, the court declined to grant a stay of execution, finding that the appellants had not met the requirements under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, particularly given the age of the suit and lack of sufficient grounds for stay.

Court Disposition

Application partially allowed.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the appellants to file an appeal out of time against the judgment delivered on July 30, 2021.
  • The draft memorandum of appeal is deemed duly filed upon payment of requisite fees.