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 AppealPartially AllowedNot stated in the ruling (ELRCJR No. E001 of 2023 is the underlying matter; Civil Appeal No. E009 of 2025 referenced)· [2025] KECA 563 (KLR)

Kirinyaga County Public Service Board v Kenya Union of Medical Laboratory Officers

Court of Appeal of Kenya
28 March 2025
SKS. Ole Kantai
632 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal accepted technical failures on the Judiciary's e-filing platform as a valid reason to extend time for filing a notice of appeal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling by a single Judge of the Court of Appeal at Nyeri, delivered by S. Ole Kantai, JA, on 28th March 2025, on a Motion by Kirinyaga County Public Service Board under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules. The applicant sought enlargement of time to file and serve notice of appeal against a judgment of Makau, J of 9th August 2024, dismissing its judicial review application in ELRCJR No. E001 of 2023, and sought that a notice of appeal lodged on 27th August 2024 be deemed properly filed. The applicant explained that on 20th August 2024 it encountered technical hitches with the Judiciary's CTS e-filing platform, which was only restored on 24th August 2024, when its lawyers found the case had disappeared from the tracking system and they had been mapped out. The respondent, through its General Secretary Pius Nyakundi, opposed and suggested the application should abide a similar application in Civil Appeal No. E009 of 2025. The court applied the settled Leo Sila Mutiso v Helen Wangari Mwangi principles on extension of time, accepted the technical e-filing failure as a sufficient explanation for the delay, recognized the shift to online filing, and allowed the application. Time was extended, the notice of appeal deemed duly filed subject to payment of court fees if not already paid, and costs of the Motion were made costs in the appeal. The decision below was not disturbed; the ruling concerns only extension of time.

Key legal issues

#
01

Extension of time to file notice of appeal

Holding

The court exercised its discretion to extend time where the applicant was prevented from filing on time by technical failures of the Judiciary e-filing (CTS) platform, accepting that explanation for the delay.

Reasoning

Applying the Leo Sila Mutiso principles (length of delay, reason for delay, chances of appeal succeeding, prejudice to respondent), the court found the delay attributable to the online filing system failing to accept documents and the case disappearing from the CTS. Technical changes to e-filing were recognized as a valid reason for delay, justifying extension and deeming of the late notice.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A single Judge of the Court of Appeal may, under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, enlarge time for filing notice of appeal and deem a late notice as properly filed.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Time for lodging notice of appeal is extended
  2. 2.The notice of appeal lodged on 27th August, 2024 is deemed duly filed subject to payment of court fees if not already paid
  3. 3.Costs of the Motion will be in the appeal
On appeal from
Employment and Labour Relations Court
ELRCJR No. E001 of 2023
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules (single Judge jurisdiction to enlarge time)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kirinyaga County Public Service Board v Kenya Union of Medical Laboratory Officers", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the ruling (ELRCJR No. E001 of 2023 is the underlying matter; Civil Appeal No. E009 of 2025 referenced). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/563/eng@2025-03-28

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