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

Tymster Motors Limited v Adsite Limited & another (Miscellaneous Application E040 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 4512 (KLR) (8 April 2025) (Ruling)

[2025] KEELC 4512 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
4512
Citation
[2025] KEELC 4512 (KLR)
Decided
8 April 2025
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeMiscellaneous ApplicationPostureApplication for leave to file an appeal out of timeCoramJG KEMEI
The application is allowed

Facts

Tymster Motors Limited seeks leave to file an appeal out of time against the Business Premises Rent Tribunal's decision dated 17/1/25. The 1st Respondent, Adsite Limited, erected a billboard on the property owned by Tymster Motors Limited.

Issues

  • Whether the affidavit sworn by the applicant's counsel is improper
  • Whether the applicant is deserving of leave to file an appeal out of time

Reasoning

The delay in filing the application was explained by the delay in obtaining the ruling. The Court considers the application to be timely and grants leave to file the appeal.

Outcome

The application is allowed

Orders

  • The costs of this application shall abide the outcome of the appeal

Authorities cited

Cases cited (3)
  • Oriental Commercial Bank Ltd v Shreeji Contractors Ltd & 2 others [2021] eKLR
  • Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 7 others [2014] eKLR
  • Nyamboki v Gathuru (Application 6 of 2019) [2019] KESC 44 (KLR)
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case