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

Mbugua & 79 others v Ngotho & 9 others (Civil Appeal (Application) E050 of 2023) [2024] KECA 455 (KLR) (12 April 2024) (Ruling)

[2024] KECA 455 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
455
Citation
[2024] KECA 455 (KLR)
Decided
12 April 2024
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil Appeal (Application)PostureApplication for leave to file an appeal out of timeCoramM. Njoroge, M. Njoroge, WK KORIR
Holding

The applicants are not entitled to an extension of time for filing the record of appeal.

Facts

The applicants filed a notice of appeal against the judgment of the Environment and Land Court on July 18, 2022, but did not file the record of appeal within 60 days as required by the Court of Appeal Rules. They sought an extension of time for filing the record of appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants have tendered satisfactory reasons for the delay in filing the record of appeal.
  2. Whether the applicants are entitled to an extension of time for filing the record of appeal.

Reasoning

The applicants did not provide any explanation for the delay in filing the record of appeal. The court found that the statements made in their submissions cannot serve as evidence and that evidence should be tendered through an affidavit.

Outcome

The application for leave to file an appeal out of time is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to file an appeal out of time is dismissed.
  • The application for stay of execution pending appeal is dismissed.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2022
Cases cited (1)
  • County Executive of Kisumu v. County Government of Kisumu & 8 others (2017) eKLR
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