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

Humming Healthcare Limited v Asterisk Limited (Civil Appeal (Application) E636 of 2023) [2024] KECA 243 (KLR) (8 March 2024) (Ruling)

[2024] KECA 243 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
243
Citation
[2024] KECA 243 (KLR)
Decided
8 March 2024
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil Appeal (Application)PostureApplication for extension of time to deem the already filed record of appeal as having been properly filed and served within timeCoramSG KAIRU, JA
Holding

The application is allowed, with the result that the record of appeal filed herein be deemed as having been filed and served.

Facts

Humming Healthcare Limited filed a notice of appeal against a judgment of the High Court lifting the veil of incorporation and ordering the directors to satisfy a judgment entered in favor of Asterisk Limited. The High Court granted leave to file the notice of appeal on 28th July 2022, but the notice of appeal was filed on 11th August 2022. The advocates for the applicant failed to apply for typed proceedings within 30 days as required under Rule 84 of the Court of Appeal Rules.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant is entitled to an extension of time to file the record of appeal and deem it as having been properly filed and served within time.
  2. Whether the extension of time granted by the High Court for filing the notice of appeal also extended the 30-day period under Rule 84.

Reasoning

The applicant failed to apply for a copy of the proceedings within the 30-day period under Rule 84, despite the extension of time granted by the High Court for filing the notice of appeal. The High Court's extension of time for filing the notice of appeal did not extend the 30-day period for applying for a copy of the proceedings.

Outcome

The application is allowed.

Orders

  • The record of appeal filed herein be deemed as having been filed and served.
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