SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

John Tomno Cheserem v Sammy Kipketer Cheruiyot [2018] KECA 850 (KLR)

[2018] KECA 850 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
850
Citation
[2018] KECA 850 (KLR)
Decided
15 February 2018
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureApplication for extension of time to file and serve the Notice of Appeal and Record of AppealCoramJ. MOHAMMED
Holding

The court granted the application for extension of time to file the Notice of Appeal and Record of Appeal out of time.

Facts

The applicant filed the Notice of Appeal on 27 February 2017, which was outside the prescribed 14-day time limit. The applicant sought an extension of time due to intervening matters beyond his control.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant's explanation for the delay in filing the Notice of Appeal is reasonable and excusable.
  2. Whether the applicant's application for extension of time is a gross abuse of the court process.

Reasoning

The court exercised its discretion under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, considering factors such as the period of delay, reasons for the delay, and the degree of prejudice to the respondent. The court found that the applicant's explanation for the delay was reasonable and excusable.

Outcome

The application was granted.

Orders

  • The court granted leave to the applicant to file the Record of Appeal out of time.
  • The applicant's draft Record of Appeal was deemed as properly filed and served subject to payment of the requisite court fees.
  • The court ordered costs to be in the cause.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (3)
  • Fakir Mohammed V Joseph Mugambi & 2 Others
  • Mwangi V Kenya Airways Ltd
  • Wasike V Swala
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case