Ben Mwita Matinde v Salinah Kosgey
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal refused to excuse a five-year delay in filing an appeal, dismissing the application because the excuses given were unconvincing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicant deserved an extension of time under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules
The application was dismissed: a five-year delay was inordinate, the reasons given were unconvincing, the applicant did not explain the status of procuring proceedings, and the pandemic excuse failed because online filing existed. The applicant did not deserve the benefit of the Court's discretion.
The Court applied the settled Fahir Mohammed principles: period and reason for delay, chances of success, prejudice and related factors. It found the delay was about five years; consultation on prospects should not take that long; rule 120 caters for those unable to raise fees; the applicant never said when he applied for proceedings or whether he obtained them; and the online filing platform was already operational at the time of judgment, defeating the COVID-19 explanation. The Court concluded the applicant was trying his luck and dismissed the Motion.
Legal principles established
#- The factors for extension of time under Rule 4 are not exhaustive; the Court's discretion is unfettered and considers all relevant factors including delay, reasons, chances of success, prejudice, public administration, compliance with time limits, resources and public importance
- Consultation on the prospects of an appeal cannot justify a delay measured in years, and inability to pay fees is addressed by the waiver/waiver-equivalent machinery under rule 120 of the Court of Appeal Rules, so neither excuse suffices for an inordinate delay
- The COVID-19 pandemic is not an acceptable excuse for failure to appeal where courts had already established online filing platforms
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 7th November 2025 is dismissed
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Eldoret
- HCCA No. 133 of 2014
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rules 41, 42 and 43(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022; substantively Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules (extension of time)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ben Mwita Matinde v Salinah Kosgey", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in judgment (arises from High Court HCCA No. 133 of 2014, Eldoret). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/31/eng@2026-01-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.