Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedNot stated in the judgment excerpt

NIMA INVESTMENTS LIMITED v STEPHEN MBUKI KIMANI [2000] KECA 362 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
7 November 2000
ALA.A. Lakha
108 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal gave a party who missed the appeal deadline extra time to file, but ordered them to pay the other side's costs.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short interlocutory ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi, delivered by A.A. Lakha, JA, on 7 November 2000, on an application for extension of time. Having heard counsel for both parties and considered all the circumstances of the case, the judge was satisfied that it was a proper case in which to exercise the court's discretion and grant the extension sought. The court ordered that the Notice of Appeal be filed within 7 days from the date of the ruling and that the Record of Appeal be filed within 21 days thereafter. On costs, the applicant was ordered to pay the Respondent the costs of the application, assessed at K.Shs.5,000/=, payable within 10 days, failing which execution may issue. The ruling does not identify the parties, the case number, the decision sought to be appealed, or any authorities; it is a discretionary case-management decision rather than a substantive appellate determination. No decision below was reviewed or disturbed, and no questions of law were resolved beyond the exercise of the extension-of-time discretion. The binding takeaway for practitioners is narrow: the Court of Appeal will grant an extension where, on the circumstances presented and after hearing both sides, it is satisfied the case merits the indulgence, and it may attach modest assessed costs and a strict filing timetable to the grant.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to file the Notice of Appeal and the Record of Appeal

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether extension of time to institute an appeal should be granted

Holding

Extension granted; the court exercised its discretion in favour of the applicant on the circumstances presented.

Reasoning

The single judge, having heard advocates for both parties and considered all the circumstances of the case, was satisfied that this was a proper case in which to exercise discretion. The judgment does not set out the factors in detail; it simply records satisfaction and grants the extension with a fixed timetable and modest costs.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The Court of Appeal may, in the exercise of its discretion, grant an extension of time for filing a Notice of Appeal and Record of Appeal where satisfied that it is a proper case to do so.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Notice of Appeal to be filed within 7 days from the date of the order
  2. 2.Record of Appeal to be filed within 21 days thereafter
  3. 3.Applicant to pay the Respondent costs of the application assessed at K.Shs.5,000/= within 10 days, failing which execution may issue

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

AL
majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent discretion of the Court of Appeal to extend time for filing a Notice and Record of Appeal (provision not cited in the judgment)

Quotable passages

#

Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.

Accordingly, I order that Notice of Appeal be filed within 7 days from today and the Record of Appeal within 21 days thereafter.
p. 2Final orders - extension of time granted
The applicant shall pay to the Respondent costs of this application assessed at K.Shs.5,000/= payable within 10 days failing which execution may issue.
p. 2Costs of the application

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The judgment excerpt does not state the case title, case number, or the provision under which the extension application was brought.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "NIMA INVESTMENTS LIMITED v STEPHEN MBUKI KIMANI [2000] KECA 362 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2000). Not stated in the judgment excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2000/362/eng@2000-11-07

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.