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 AppealDismissedApplication dated 20th March, 2023· [2023] KECA 1345 (KLR)

Cleophas Maende Makokha v Stella Watende Maende

Court of Appeal of Kenya
10 November 2023
2,474 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~10 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal refused to extend appeal time because the applicant's own messages showed he knew about the judgment, proving blaming lawyers won't work.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a single-judge application under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules seeking extension of time to lodge a notice of appeal against a High Court judgment delivered on 10th February 2023 in a matrimonial property dispute, and deeming of a notice of appeal dated 9th March 2023 as properly filed. The applicant blamed his former advocates for failing to inform him of the judgment date and deponed that the judgment was delivered in his absence. The respondent countered that both the applicant and his counsel were present at delivery, pointing to a text message the applicant sent acknowledging the outcome. Ochieng, JA considered the settled Rule 4 parameters from Leo Sila Mutiso, Fakir Mohammed and Muringa Company Ltd: length and reason for delay, arguability of the appeal, and prejudice. The court found the 24-day delay not inordinate in itself, but held that the applicant's own exhibits - a text message of 20th February 2023 and an email of 1st March 2023 - showed he knew the ruling had been delivered and was unfavourable, and his submissions contradicted his affidavit by asserting he had instructed his former advocates to appeal. Applying Bi-Mach Engineers and Habo Agencies, the court held that blaming counsel is insufficient where the client fails to follow up the matter. Although the intended appeal was arguable, the absence of a plausible explanation for the delay disentitled the applicant to the discretion. The application was dismissed on 10th November 2023 at Nakuru. No express costs order appears in the final orders.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the 24-day delay in lodging the notice of appeal was satisfactorily explained

Holding

It was not; the applicant's own messages and submissions showed he knew of the judgment and the unfavourable outcome

Reasoning

The court found from a text message dated 20th February 2023 and an email of 1st March 2023 that the applicant was aware the ruling had been delivered and was asking only for a copy. His submissions also contradicted his affidavit, indicating he had instructed his former advocates to appeal. The court therefore found no plausible explanation for the delay and declined to exercise its discretion under Rule 4.

p. 6
02

Whether the intended appeal was arguable

Holding

Yes, the intended appeal raised arguable issues, but this alone did not justify extension of time

Reasoning

Although the court accepted that the draft memorandum of appeal raised arguable grounds, it held that because no plausible explanation for the delay was given, the arguability of the appeal could not rescue the application. Arguability is only one, non-determinative, factor in the Rule 4 discretion.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • Rule 4 does not prescribe factors; courts apply relevant, non-exhaustive discretionary factors including length of delay, reason for delay, chances of success and prejudice to the respondent
  • A party seeking extension of time must give a plausible and satisfactory explanation for the delay; blaming counsel alone is insufficient because the client has a duty to follow up the matter

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 20th March, 2023 is dismissed
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Cleophas Maende Makokha v Stella Watende Maende", Case Analysis (2023). Application dated 20th March, 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2023/1345/eng@2023-11-10

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