Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Kenya decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The High Court granted leave to appeal out of time and a conditional stay of execution, after finding the delay was explained by CTS scheduling irregularities.
The High Court granted leave to appeal out of time after a three-day delay, but dismissed the request for stay of execution and stay of proceedings.
Katumo v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E050 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 13026 (KLR) (21 August 2026) (Ruling)
The application failed because the applicant did not demonstrate a sufficient basis for the delay, and in any event the High Court lacked jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal out of time to the Court of Appeal; that jurisdiction lies with the Court of Appeal. The request was therefore dismissed, though the court directed that judgment and proceedings, if not already supplied, be supplied.
Source excerpt
Kaur t/a Kavraj Kaur & Associates v Kumar (Miscellaneous Civil Application E079 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 12878 (KLR) (13 August 2026) (Ruling)
The Court held that the ten-month delay was sufficiently explained because the Applicant said it had not been served and only learnt of the decree upon service, while it was pursuing a related appeal. The intended appeal raised arguable issues on locus standi, ownership of the suit properties, and alleged violation of the right to be heard. Res judicata did not apply because the prior appeal concerned an interlocutory ruling and was still pending, whereas this application challenged the final judgment. The Court was satisfied that substantial loss was shown and granted stay subject to securit…
Source excerpt
Structural Construction International Ltd v Muigai (Cause E033 of 2026) [2026] KEELRC 2396 (KLR) (12 August 2026) (Ruling)
The Court held that the Applicant sufficiently explained the delay because the judgment was delivered without notice and the record did not show service of judgment or decree on the Applicant. The draft memorandum raised appealable issues, prejudice to the Respondent could be managed by security, and therefore discretion should be exercised in favour of the Applicant. Leave to appeal out of time and stay of execution were granted on conditions.
Source excerpt
In re Estate of Nkarichia (Deceased) (Succession Cause 184 of 2004) [2026] KEHC 12958 (KLR) (5 August 2026) (Ruling)
The High Court lacked jurisdiction to grant the orders sought because the applicant had already filed a Notice of Appeal on time; section 7 of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act only covers the first extension for giving notice of intention to appeal, and once that step was taken, any further relief relating to the appeal lay exclusively before the Court of Appeal. The preliminary objection was therefore meritorious and the application was struck out.
Source excerpt
Merie v Gakuya & 3 others (Environment and Land Case E129 of 2021) [2026] KEELC 5082 (KLR) (4 August 2026) (Ruling)
The applicant failed to meet the threshold for stay of proceedings because no pending appeal was shown, the request should have been pursued in the appellate court, and the long pendency of the suit militated against further delay. The applicant also failed to justify leave to appeal out of time, having provided no notice of appeal, draft appeal, or adequate basis for extension of time. The motion was therefore dismissed.
Source excerpt
Njuki v Njuki & 3 others (Civil Application E106 of 2024) [2026] KECA 1567 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)
The Court found that non-service of the reference application was uncontroverted and that the respondents had shown contemporaneous internet difficulties. However, instead of setting aside the proceedings of 4th May 2026, the Court held that justice was better served by allowing the respondents' replying affidavit and submissions to be considered before the reserved ruling on the reference, with costs to abide the outcome of that reference.
Source excerpt
Nderito & 2 others v Nderito & another (Civil Application E063, E064 & E065 of 2026 (Consolidated)) [2026] KECA 1596 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)
The applicants’ delay of more than a decade from the 2015 ruling and over six years from the 2019 ruling was wholly unreasonable, their explanation was not candid or credible, and their concealment of a prior review application destroyed their claim to equitable relief. The Court therefore declined to extend time and dismissed the applications with costs.
Source excerpt
Cheruiyot (Suing in his own Capacity as an Administrator of the Estate of Esther Cheruiyot) & another v AIC Ainabkoi Church & 7 others (Civil Application E074 of 2026) [2026] KECA 1555 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)
The applicants demonstrated a timely intention to appeal, gave a plausible explanation for the delay in obtaining proceedings, faced no opposition, and showed an arguable draft appeal with no demonstrated prejudice to the respondents; therefore, the Court exercised discretion to extend time. The stay prayers were not determined by the single judge because they fall outside single-judge jurisdiction.
Source excerpt
Explore more
