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

Osman v Gilani (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E079 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 801 (KLR) (17 February 2026) (Ruling)

[2026] KEELC 801 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
801
Citation
[2026] KEELC 801 (KLR)
Decided
17 February 2026
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeMiscellaneousPostureRespondent's Application for DismissalCoramMAO ODENY
Holding

The court dismissed the application with costs, finding that the Applicant did not meet the threshold for the grant of leave to file an appeal out of time.

Facts

The Applicant, Yahya Yussuf Osman, sought to extend the time to file an appeal out of time due to alleged delays in filing an application to clear rent arrears. The Respondent, Mohineen Alibhai Gilani, opposed the application, citing lack of explanation for the delay and potential prejudice to the Respondent.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant should be granted the reliefs sought
  2. Who should bear costs

Reasoning

The court considered the guidelines laid down in Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 7 Others (2013) eKLR and found that the Applicant did not sufficiently explain the reason for the delay in filing the appeal. The court also noted that the Applicant had engaged new legal representation and used other avenues to avoid compliance with the court's orders.

Outcome

Dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs

Authorities cited

Cases cited (2)
  • Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 7 Others (2013) eKLR
  • County Executive of Kisumu v County Government of Kisumu & 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