Githinji v Kenya Medical Research Institute & 6 others (Civil Application E705 of 2024) [2025] KECA 1556 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal granted workers extra time to appeal because delays waiting for certified court documents don't count against them.
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 applicants should be granted extension of time to file their Record of Appeal against the ELRC judgment of 26th October 2023
- 2.Whether the delay was inordinate and satisfactorily explained
- 3.Whether the respondents would suffer prejudice if the extension is granted
Key legal issues
#Whether there was inordinate and unexplained delay warranting denial of extension of time
No inordinate delay; the certified-proceedings period was excluded under the proviso to Rule 84(1) as evidenced by the Certificate of Delay, and service of the request on the respondent was uncontested.
The court applied Rule 84(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022: where an appellant applies in writing for certified proceedings within thirty days and serves the application on the respondent, the time taken to prepare and deliver the copy is excluded. The Certificate of Delay showed preparation ran from 13th November 2023 to 25th November 2024, so the sixty-day period only began running on 26th November 2024. Reliance on the proviso required only proof of service of the written request, which the respondents did not contest.
Whether the respondents would suffer prejudice if the extension were granted
The respondents would suffer no prejudice; extension granted.
The court weighed the Salat factors: length and reason for delay, prejudice to respondents, and whether the application was brought without undue delay. Since the delay in filing the record was attributable to the registry's preparation of proceedings, an eventuality outside the applicants' control, and the application was filed before the sixty days lapsed, the respondents suffered no prejudice. The application was found merited and leave was granted for thirty days, with each party bearing own costs.
Legal principles established
#- Extension of time is a discretionary, equitable remedy available only to a deserving party who explains the delay and shows no prejudice to the respondent.
- Under the proviso to Rule 84(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022, the time certified by the registrar for preparation of proceedings is excluded where the appellant's written application for the copy was served on the respondent.
- There is no minimum or maximum period of delay; any delay must be satisfactorily explained.
Court orders
#- 1.The applicants are granted leave to file and serve a Record of Appeal against the judgment delivered on 26th October 2023 in ELRC Cause No. 1545 of 2018 within thirty (30) days of the date of delivery of the ruling
- 2.Each party to meet their own costs of the application
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Cause No. 1545 of 2018
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022 (extension of time to file Record of 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.
The applicants are accordingly granted leave to file and serve a Record of Appeal against the judgment delivered on 26th October 2023 by the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi (O. Kebira J.) in Cause No. 1545 of 2018, within thirty (30) days of the date of delivery of this ruling.
Each party shall meet their own costs of the application.
The only requirement for reliance on the proviso to sub-rule (1) is that of service of a copy of the application for certified proceedings on the respondent.
Extension of time is not a right of a party. It is an equitable remedy that is only available to a deserving party at the discretion of the Court
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment states the Notice of Appeal was filed on 9th November 2023, but the copy annexed by the applicants indicates it was lodged on 27th November 2023, outside the time for filing a notice of appeal.
The judgment states at one point that the application was filed without delay because the sixty days had not lapsed, but later notes the sixty days had lapsed by the date of hearing.
The 1st respondent's submissions are dated 6th August 2025 yet the application was heard on 29th July 2025, an apparent date inconsistency.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Githinji v Kenya Medical Research Institute & 6 others (Civil Application E705 of 2024) [2025] KECA 1556 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Application dated 28th November 2024 (Cause No. 1545 of 2018, ELRC Nairobi). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/1556/eng@2025-10-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.