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 AppealAllowedNotice of Motion dated 16th January 2020· [2023] KECA 508 (KLR)

Kagiri v Wambugu (Suing as the legal representative of the estate of Hannah Wanjiru Wangai (Deceased) (Civil Appeal (Application) 333 of 2019) [2023] KECA 508 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
12 May 2023
936 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 excused a missed appeal deadline caused by an administrative slip, ruling that missing a procedural copy requirement should not destroy your right to appeal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Simon Kagiri sought an extension of time to lodge his Memorandum and Record of Appeal against a decision of the Environment and Land Court delivered on 28th February 2019. He filed a Notice of Appeal on 13th March 2019 and simultaneously wrote to the Deputy Registrar for certified proceedings, which were supplied on 30th August 2019 with a Certificate of Delay on 2nd September 2019. He filed the Memorandum and Record of Appeal on 19th December 2019. The respondent objected that the letter bespeaking the proceedings had not been copied to her, so the applicant could not rely on the certificate of delay under the proviso to Rule 84(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules. F. Ochieng JA held that Rule 84(2) expressly requires the written application for certified proceedings to be served on the respondent, and since this was not done, the applicant could not rely on the proviso or the certificate of delay. However, invoking Rule 1(2) on the court's inherent power, the court found it would be an injustice to shut out the applicant from his constitutional right of appeal for that omission, particularly as the appeal had been lodged and served since 2019 and the respondent would suffer no prejudice. The motion dated 16th January 2020 was allowed: the Memorandum and Record of Appeal were deemed filed and served within time. Costs of the application were made costs in the cause in the substantive appeal. This is a single-judge ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nakuru, delivered on 12th May 2023.

Key legal issues

#
01

Effect of failure to copy the letter bespeaking proceedings to the respondent

Holding

The applicant could not rely on the proviso to Rule 84(1) because the letter requesting certified proceedings was not copied to the respondent, as required by Rule 84(2); the certificate of delay therefore could not be used, and the applicant had to invoke the court's unfettered discretion under its inherent power, which was granted without prejudice to the respondent.

Reasoning

Rule 84(2) specifically requires written application for proceedings to be served on the respondent before the proviso to Rule 84(1) can be invoked. The applicant's letter was not copied to the respondent, so the certificate of delay could not assist. However, Rule 1(2) preserves the court's inherent power to make orders necessary for the ends of justice; shutting out the applicant for this failure would be an injustice, and the respondent would suffer no prejudice since the memorandum had been lodged and served since 2019.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An appellant is not entitled to rely on the proviso to Rule 84(1) excluding certification time unless the application for certified proceedings was in writing and served upon the respondent; failure to serve does not bar the appeal but requires the appellant to seek the Court's unfettered discretionary extension of time under its inherent power.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated 16th January 2020 is allowed
  2. 2.The Memorandum of Appeal and the Record of Appeal served on 19th December 2019 are deemed to have been filed and served within time
  3. 3.Costs of the application to be in the cause, in the substantive appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 84(1)
  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 84(1) proviso
  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 84(2)
  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 1(2)

Cases cited (1)

  • Samuel Kuria v Mbugua Kimani
    Civil Appeal No. 151 of 1996
On appeal from
Environment and Land Court
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 1(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules - inherent power of the Court to make orders necessary for the ends of justice

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kagiri v Wambugu (Suing as the legal representative of the estate of Hannah Wanjiru Wangai (Deceased) (Civil Appeal (Application) 333 of 2019) [2023] KECA 508 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Notice of Motion dated 16th January 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2023/508/eng@2023-05-12

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