Justus Majau v Erastus Muriungi (Deceased) Thro' Janet Mwari Muriungi [2013] KECA 86 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that asking for certified court proceedings pauses the appeal deadline, protecting litigants from the courts' own delays.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the intended appeal was time barred under Rule 82 of the Court of Appeal Rules
Time for instituting the appeal stopped running on 5th November 2007 when the respondent requested certified proceedings and could only resume upon delivery of those proceedings; since the High Court has not availed them, the appeal is not time barred
Rule 82 requires an appeal to be instituted within sixty days of the Notice of Appeal, excluding any period certified by the registrar as required to prepare proceedings. The respondent requested certified copies by letter dated 5th November 2007 and made numerous follow-up requests without success. Following Mariamu Abubakar Ireri and Nyeri Wholesalers, the requested period is excluded in computing time, so the appeal cannot be struck out as time barred.
Whether the applicants proved that the letter requesting proceedings was not served on their counsel
There was no evidence in support of the applicants' contention that the request letter was never served on their advocates
The applicants bore the burden of establishing non-service of the letter requesting certified proceedings, which would have defeated the exclusion of time. Counsel's argument that the letter was not served was unsupported by evidence, and the respondent's counsel denied this. The court was not persuaded, and the computation of time proceeded on the basis that the request was properly copied to the applicants' counsel.
Legal principles established
#- Upon requesting copies of proceedings from the court where the request letter is copied to the opposing party's counsel, the time prescribed for filing an appeal stops running and resumes only when the certified proceedings are delivered
- Where certified proceedings requested by a party have not been availed by the High Court, the intended appeal cannot be time barred under Rule 82, as the excluded period remains uncomputed
Court orders
#- 1.The applicants' application dated 3rd July 2012 to strike out the Notice of Appeal is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondent
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Meru
- H.C.C.C No. 54 of 1986
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 82 of the Court of Appeal Rules and Section 3A & 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Chapter 8, Laws of Kenya
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Justus Majau v Erastus Muriungi (Deceased) Thro' Janet Mwari Muriungi [2013] KECA 86 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Civil Application No. NAI. 234 of 2012. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2013/86/eng@2013-12-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.