Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedCivil Application (extension of time motion) arising from ELRC Cause No. 1830 of 2015· [2024] KECA 278 (KLR)

Uzuri Foods Limited v Ngwenze & 169 others (Civil Application E429 of 2023) [2024] KECA 278 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
8 March 2024
SKS. Ole Kantai
1,157 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal gave Uzuri Foods more time to appeal because a misplaced file during an office move counted as a reasonable explanation for the delay.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Uzuri Foods Limited moved the Court of Appeal, by motion under section 3(1) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Rules 4, 41, 42 and 49 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2010, for leave to file and serve its record of appeal out of time against the judgment of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Wasilwa, J.) in ELRC Cause No. 1830 of 2015. The applicant explained that although it filed a notice of appeal on time and besp proceedings promptly, its advocates' file was misplaced when the law firm relocated offices, causing the record of appeal not to be filed in time. The respondents opposed, arguing the application was fatally defective, that the delay of over a year was unexplained, that the appeal had been deemed abandoned, and that execution of the ELRC judgment was at an advanced stage. Applying the settled factors summarised in Leo Sila Mutiso vs. Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi - the length of delay, the reason for the delay, the chances of the appeal succeeding, and prejudice to the respondent - Ole Kantai, JA found the relocation and misplacement of the file to be a reasonable explanation, held the application was not brought with unreasonable delay, and noted the intended appeal raised reasonable grounds. The court allowed the motion, directed that the record of appeal be filed within ten days, and ordered that costs of the motion be in the appeal. This is an interlocutory single-judge ruling on extension of time; it does not disturb the ELRC judgment and is not a final determination of the appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether misplacement of a file during an advocate's office relocation constitutes a reasonable explanation for delay in filing a record of appeal

Holding

Yes - the court accepted the explanation as reasonable and exercised its discretion in the applicant's favour.

Reasoning

The court noted that a notice of appeal was filed on the day of judgment and proceedings were bespoken the next day, showing diligence. The delay was attributed to the law firm's relocation during which the file was misplaced. The court found that misplacing a file can readily occur during an office move, that the application was not brought with unreasonable delay in the circumstances, and that the appeal raised reasonable grounds, justifying an extension of time.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The decision whether or not to extend time for appealing is discretionary, taking into account the length of delay, the reason for the delay, the chances of the appeal succeeding, and the prejudice to the respondent.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Leave granted to the applicant to file and serve the record of appeal out of time
  2. 2.Record of appeal to be filed within ten (10) days of the ruling
  3. 3.Costs of the motion to be in the appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Appellate Jurisdiction ActSection 3(1)
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2010Rules 4, 41, 42 and 49
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2022

Cases cited (4)

  • Vishva Stone Suppliers Company Limited vs. RSR Stone
    Civil Application No. 55 of 2020 (unreported)
  • Paul Wanjohi Mathenge vs. Duncan Gichane Mathenge
    [2013] eKLR
  • Nicholas Kiptor Arap Korir vs. Independent Electoral Boundaries Commission & 7 Others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Leo Sila Mutiso vs. Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi
    [1999] 2 EA 231
On appeal from
Employment and Labour Relations Court
ELRC Cause No. 1830 of 2015
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 3(1) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Rules 4, 41, 42 and 49 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2010

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Uzuri Foods Limited v Ngwenze & 169 others (Civil Application E429 of 2023) [2024] KECA 278 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Civil Application (extension of time motion) arising from ELRC Cause No. 1830 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2024/278/eng@2024-03-08

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