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 the judgment· [2021] KECA 655 (KLR)

Lungui v Mwai ((Deceased)) (Civil Appeal 144 of 2019) [2021] KECA 655 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
23 April 2021
1,079 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Court of Appeal gave a litigant 30 more days to file an appeal record because his former lawyer's delay shouldn't punish him.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling by a single judge of the Court of Appeal (M. K. Koome, JA) on a motion dated 29th April 2019 brought under Section 7 of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, seeking extension of time to file and serve the record of appeal. The intended appeal challenges the judgment of Angote, J. of the Environment and Land Court at Machakos delivered on 2nd March 2018 in ELC 175 of 2014, in which the court invalidated a sale agreement over parcel Kyangwithya/Tungutu/1124, registered in the name of the respondent's late husband, on the ground that no grant of letters of administration had been obtained, dismissed the applicant's counterclaim for a refund of Kshs. 2,100,000, and ordered him to vacate the suit property. The applicant attributed the delay to his previous advocates, as the trial file was held in the Judge's chambers while a stay application was handled. Applying the principles in Nicholas Kiptoo Korir Arap Salat v IEBC, and the principle that counsel's mistake should not be visited on the client, the judge found the delay reasonably explained and allowed the application. The respondent's contention that the appeal was unarguable was rejected as a matter for the full Bench. The applicant was given thirty days to file and serve the Notice and Record of Appeal, with costs of the application to abide the outcome of the intended appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the applicant's explanation for the delay in filing the record of appeal was reasonable

Holding

The delay was attributed to the applicant's previous advocates, and the applicant demonstrated he changed representation; the delay was reasonably explained.

Reasoning

The single judge considered the applicant's affidavit showing the trial court file was held in the Judge's chambers during an auxiliary stay application, and a letter dated 10th April 2019 evidencing a change of advocates. Relying on Catherine Njoguini Kenya & 2 Others v Commercial Bank of Africa, the judge found counsel's mistake should not be visited on the client and gave the applicant the benefit of doubt.

p. 3
02

Whether the single judge should assess the arguability of the intended appeal

Holding

It is not the role of a single judge to determine the merits of the intended appeal; that is the province of the full Bench.

Reasoning

The respondent argued the intended appeal had no chance of success because the trial court had determined a point of law that a sale agreement over land registered in the name of a deceased person without a grant is null and void. The judge held that whether the appeal is arguable is for the Bench hearing the appeal, and having found reasonable explanation for the delay, granted the extension.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Extension of time is not a right; it is an equitable remedy available to a deserving party at the discretion of the court, guided by the Salat principles, and a single judge does not determine the merits of the intended appeal.
  • A mistake or omission of counsel should not be visited on the client when considering extension of time.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Extension of time granted to the applicant to file and serve the Notice and Record of Appeal
  2. 2.The applicant is given thirty (30) days from the date of the Ruling to file and serve the Notice and Record of Appeal
  3. 3.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the intended appeal
On appeal from
Environment and Land Court, Machakos
ELC 175 of 2014
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 7 of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Lungui v Mwai ((Deceased)) (Civil Appeal 144 of 2019) [2021] KECA 655 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2021/655/eng@2021-04-23

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