Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedNot stated in judgment· [2010] KECA 6 (KLR)

Yasmin Abdulkari T/A Y.A. Ali Advocates v Southern Credit Banking Corporation Ltd [2010] KECA 6 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
12 October 2010
161 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 allowed an unopposed request to extend appeal deadlines but still made the applicant pay the other side's legal costs.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short single-judge ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi delivered on 12th October 2010 by M. Ole Keiwua, JA, on a notice of motion dated 14th June 2010 seeking enlargement of time within which to lodge and serve a Notice of Appeal. The Notice of Appeal was dated 4th May 2010 and had been lodged in the superior court on 5th May 2010. When the application came up, learned counsel for the respondent, Mr Mutugi, did not oppose it. On that concession the court allowed the application: the notice of appeal was deemed to have been lodged in the superior court on 5th May 2010, and the notice was also deemed to have been served on the respondent within the time allowed by rule 76(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules. However, the indulgence was not free of costs - the court ordered that the applicant pay the respondent's costs of the application in any event. The ruling does not identify the case number, the parties, the decision sought to be appealed, or the superior court from which the appeal would lie, and no substantive appeal was determined. The decision turned entirely on the unopposed nature of the application and the exercise of the court's discretion to enlarge time; no authority was cited. Its value is procedural, illustrating the deeming device used where an extension of time for lodgment and service of a notice of appeal is granted without opposition.

Key legal issues

#
01

Extension of time for lodgment and service of a Notice of Appeal

Holding

Extension granted on the unopposed application; the notice of appeal was deemed lodged on 5th May 2010 and deemed served on the respondent within the time allowed by rule 76(1) of the Court's Rules, with costs of the application to the respondent.

Reasoning

The applicant applied on 14th June 2010 for enlargement of time to lodge and serve a notice of appeal dated 4th May 2010 and lodged on 5th May 2010. Counsel for the respondent did not oppose the application. On that concession the court deemed the notice lodged and served within the enlarged time, but awarded the respondent the costs of the application in any event.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • Where an application for extension of time to lodge and serve a notice of appeal is unopposed, the court may deem the notice lodged and served within the enlarged time under rule 76(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of appeal is deemed to have been lodged in the superior court on the 5th May 2010
  2. 2.The notice of appeal is deemed to have been served on the respondent within the time allowed by rule 76(1) of the Court's Rule
  3. 3.The applicant to pay the respondent's costs of the application in any event
On appeal from
Superior Court
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent jurisdiction under the Court of Appeal Rules to enlarge time (application for extension of time within which to lodge and serve Notice of Appeal)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Yasmin Abdulkari T/A Y.A. Ali Advocates v Southern Credit Banking Corporation Ltd [2010] KECA 6 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2010). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2010/6/eng@2010-10-12

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