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

Sultan Hasham Lalji v Diamond Hasham Lalji & 2 others [2019] KECA 133 (KLR)

[2019] KECA 133 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
133
Citation
[2019] KECA 133 (KLR)
Decided
25 November 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureApplication for extension of time to file and serve the record of appealCoramR. N. Nambuye
Holding

The application is granted as the delay is only for nine days and not inordinate.

Facts

A ruling was delivered on 19th April 2016, and the applicant filed a notice of appeal on 25th April 2016. The appeal was served on the opposite parties on 28th and 29th April 2016. The applicant applied for a certified copy of the proceedings on 20th April 2016 and the proceedings were supplied on 29th March 2017.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant is entitled to an extension of time to file and serve the record of appeal
  2. Whether the delay in filing the appeal is inordinate

Reasoning

The court ruled that the delay was not inordinate and that the applicant was not prejudiced by the delay.

Outcome

The application is granted.

Orders

  • The time limited to file and serve the record of appeal herein be extended.
  • The record of appeal lodged on 7th June 2017 and served upon counsel for the respondents be deemed as having been filed and served within the extended period.
  • Costs for and incidental to this motion be in the appeal.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (4)
  • Keziah Stella Pyman & 2 Others vs Paul Mwol
  • Mbaki & Others vs Macharia & Another (2005) 2EA 206
  • National Enterprises Corporation vs Mukisa Food Limited
  • Abbass Sherally and Another vs Abdul Fazaiboy
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