Muthee v Consolidated Bank of Kenya (Civil Application E122 of 2024) [2025] KECA 861 (KLR) (15 May 2025) (Ruling)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- 861
- Citation
- [2025] KECA 861 (KLR)
- Decided
- 15 May 2025
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureApplication for extension of time to file the Record of AppealCoramGV ODUNGA, Karanja, Waki
Holding
The Court allows the application for extension of time to file the Record of Appeal with a period of 30 days.
Facts
The applicant, Dennis Muthee, served a Notice of Appeal on 15 May 2024 but was unable to file the Record of Appeal due to a house fire and subsequent depression, which delayed his preparation and filing.
Issues
- Whether the Court should grant an extension of time to file the Record of Appeal due to the applicant's inability to prepare and file the appeal due to a house fire and subsequent depression.
- Whether the applicant's delay is inordinate and therefore, inexcusable.
Reasoning
The Court considers the applicant's explanation of the delay due to a house fire and subsequent depression, finding that the reason given is justifiable and that the case should be decided on its merits.
Outcome
The application for extension of time to file the Record of Appeal is granted.
Orders
- Extension of time to file the Record of Appeal with a period of 30 days.
Remedies
- Extension of time to file the Record of Appeal with a period of 30 days.
Authorities cited
Cases cited (6)
- Leo Sila Mutiso v Helen Wangari Mwangi, Civil Application No. Nai. 255 of 1997
- Crispinus Makokha Maloba v Okinyo Nawiri, Civil Application No. Nai. 31 of 1999
- Grindlays Bank International (K) & Another v George Barbour, Civil Application No. Nai. 257 of 1995
- Gichuhi Kimira v Samuel Ngunu Kimotho & Another, Civil Application No. Nai. 243 of 1995
- Janet Ngendo Kamau v Mary Wangari Mwangi, Civil Application No. Nai. 338 of 2002
- Chemwolo and Another v Kubende [1986] KLR 492; [1986-1989] EA 74
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…