Njoki v Macharia (Civil Application E371 of 2024) [2025] KECA 807 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal allowed a late appeal because the landowner wasn't told about the judgment in time and system failures were documented.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicant has laid a basis warranting the exercise of the Court's discretion to grant leave to appeal out of time against the ELC ruling of 20th March 2024
- 2.Whether the applicant has offered a reasonable and plausible explanation for the delay in filing the notice of appeal within the 14 days prescribed by Rule 77(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules
Key legal issues
#Test for extension of time under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules
The applicant bears the burden to satisfy the court that he deserves the exercise of its discretion; relevant factors include explanation of delay, prejudice to the respondent, whether the application is brought without undue delay, and public interest.
The court restated the Salat principles: extension of time is equitable, discretionary and case-specific; the delay must be explained to the satisfaction of the court; prejudice to the respondent, undue delay in bringing the application and public interest are also considered. Applying those principles, the court accepted the applicant's explanation that he only learned of the ELC judgment when served with a notice to vacate, and noted documented CTS upload failures.
Adequacy of the explanation for the delay
The applicant's explanation that he became aware of the judgment only upon service of the notice to vacate, coupled with documented failed attempts to upload documents onto the CTS, was accepted as a reasonable explanation.
Although the applicant's blame of his 'former advocates' raised questions because the same counsel appeared throughout, the court gave him the benefit of doubt. CTS extracts showed failed upload attempts from late June 2024. The underlying dispute involved ownership of land, which weighed in favour of allowing the appeal to be ventilated, though the discretion was exercised 'reluctantly'.
Legal principles established
#- Extension of time is not a right of a party but an equitable remedy available to a deserving party at the discretion of the court; the applicant bears the burden of laying a basis to the satisfaction of the court.
Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted to appeal out of time against the ruling of the ELC at Thika delivered on 20th March 2024 in Thika ELCA No. E091 of 2022
- 2.Applicant directed to file and serve the notice of appeal within 7 days of delivery of the ruling
- 3.Applicant directed to file and serve the memorandum and record of appeal within 30 days from the date of delivery of the ruling
- 4.Applicant to bear the respondent's costs of the application
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Environment and Land Court at Thika
- Thika ELCA No. E091 of 2022
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules (extension of time to appeal)
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
I reluctantly exercise the court’s discretion in favour of the applicant and grant the orders sought.
The applicant is directed: to file and serve the notice of appeal within 7 days of delivery of this ruling; to file and serve the memorandum and record of appeal within 30 days from the date of delivery of this ruling.
The applicant shall bear the respondent’s costs of this application.
extension of time is not a right of a party but an equitable remedy available to a deserving party at the discretion of the court
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment does not state the name of the respondent in the application; the respondent is referred to only as 'the respondent'.
The judgment does not bear a case number of its own; only the date of the application (17th July 2024) and the appeal below are identified.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Njoki v Macharia (Civil Application E371 of 2024) [2025] KECA 807 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Civil Application (Rule 4) — application dated 17th July 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/807/eng@2025-05-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.