Siokwet Tarita Limited v Kisii University & 2 others [2020] KECA 553 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal ruled that when a party requests appeal court proceedings on time, delays by the court itself cannot be used to strike out their appeal.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether a notice of appeal should be struck out under rule 83 where proceedings have not been filed due to the trial court's delay
The application fails because the respondents complied with rules 75, 77 and 82: the notice of appeal was filed and served in time and proceedings were bespoken within 30 days, excluding time from running; the delay lies with the trial court
The court found no dispute that the notice of appeal was filed and served within the timelines required by rules 75 and 77. A letter dated 3rd August, 2017 requested proceedings and was copied to the applicant's advocates. Under the proviso to rule 82, time therefore stopped running. The respondents had written follow-up letters to the trial court, and it was that court's duty to furnish proceedings. Accordingly there was no inaction by the respondents justifying striking out under rule 83.
Whether the Court of Appeal may review a stay of proceedings issued by the trial court on an interlocutory application without a cross-appeal
No; such a prayer is unavailable in this Court absent a notice of appeal against the stay orders
The applicant sought, in the alternative, a variation of the stay of proceedings granted by the Environment and Land Court. The court held it could not entertain that prayer because no appeal had been lodged against the orders granting the stay. The proper forum for review of those orders is the trial court itself, which the applicant was free to approach.
Legal principles established
#- Once a party timeously applies for a copy of the proceedings and copies the letter bespeaking proceedings to the other side's counsel, time for instituting the appeal is excluded under the proviso to rule 82 until delivery of the proceedings by the registrar
- Delay in furnishing proceedings for an appeal is attributable to the trial court, not to an appellant who has timeously requested them
- The Court of Appeal cannot review or vary orders of a superior court where no notice of appeal has been filed against those orders
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated and filed by the applicant was dismissed with costs to the respondents
- On appeal from
- Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
- ELC Petition No. 18 of 2016
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 83 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2010; Sections 3A and 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act; Articles 100, 48 and 50(1) of the Constitution
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Siokwet Tarita Limited v Kisii University & 2 others [2020] KECA 553 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Civil Application No. 121 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2020/553/eng@2020-07-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.