Joseph Kaberia Arimba Speaker County Assembly of Meru &3 others v Douglas Bundi Kirimi [2020] KECA 363 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal refused to excuse a 60-day unexplained delay in filing appeal documents, so the case against the Meru County Assembly Speaker stands.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the delay of approximately 60 days after receipt of certified proceedings, plus a further 14 days before filing the application, was excusable
The delay was inordinate and unexplained; the applicant failed to move with the necessary haste and sought to blame the court below for his own inaction
While the court accepted that the prosecution of the stay application and the joinder application accounted for some delay in supplying proceedings, counsel waited about 60 days after receiving certified proceedings before requesting the certificate of delay, and then took a further 14 days to file the application. Neither period was explained. The court held such conduct showed lack of candour and a failure to own up to the applicant's own omissions, and that extension of time is discretionary and equitable, not to be granted out of sympathy.
The governing principles for extension of time applications
The well-settled Mutiso principles apply: length of delay, reason for delay, chances of the appeal succeeding, and prejudice to the respondent
The court restated the four factors from Leo Sila Mutiso v Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi as the settled framework, emphasising that the decision is discretionary. However, on the facts the applicant failed principally on the reason-for-delay factor, which poisoned the exercise of discretion in his favour.
Legal principles established
#- Any delay in seeking extension of time, no matter how slight, must be satisfactorily explained; unexplained inordinate delay justifies dismissal of the application
- Extension of time is an equitable relief in the court's judicial discretion, taking account of the pleader's general conduct including candour
Court orders
#- 1.The application for extension of time to file the Memorandum and Record of Appeal is dismissed
- 2.No order as to costs
- On appeal from
- High Court
- Meru High Court Constitutional Reference No. 26 of 2017
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent discretion to enlarge time under the Court of Appeal procedure for filing Memorandum and Record of Appeal (application for extension of time)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Owouche & another v Oketch[2022] KECA 1111 (KLR)7 Oct 2022applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Joseph Kaberia Arimba Speaker County Assembly of Meru &3 others v Douglas Bundi Kirimi [2020] KECA 363 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Notice of Motion dated 7th March 2019 (Court of Appeal). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2020/363/eng@2020-08-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.