ARH v MAA (Civil Application E030 of 2020) [2022] KECA 450 (KLR) (18 March 2022) (Ruling)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- 450
- Citation
- [2022] KECA 450 (KLR)
- Decided
- 18 March 2022
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureApplication for extension of time to file notice of appealCoramK. M'INOTI
Holding
The application for extension of time is dismissed with costs to the respondent
Facts
The applicant sought 30% of the property known as Plot No. xx Marsabit, found to be matrimonial property to which the respondent had contributed. The High Court awarded the respondent 30% of the property on 23rd July 2018. The applicant sought extension of time to file a notice of appeal and a stay of execution.
Issues
- Whether the applicant's application for extension of time to file a notice of appeal is valid
- Whether the applicant's application for stay of execution is valid
Reasoning
The delay in filing the application was almost two years, which is inordinate. The applicant was busy pursuing litigation over the suit property, and there is uncontroverted evidence of no negotiations. The applicant was not candid with the court.
Outcome
Application dismissed
Authorities cited
Cases cited (3)
- Fakir Mohamed v. Joseph Mugambi & 2 Others, CA No. Nai. 332 of 2004
- Leo Sila Mutiso v. Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi, C.A. Nai. 251 of 1997
- James waweru Muturi v. Paul Thuo Njambi, CA No. Nai. 159 of 2017
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.
Loading judgment…