Kenya National Highway Authority v Sbi International Holdings (Kenya) (Civil Application E430 of 2025) [2026] KECA 147 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal let KeNHA appeal late against a Kshs. 201 million judgment because it was never told the judgment date.
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 should be granted leave to file an appeal out of time against the ex-parte interlocutory judgment of 21st March 2025
- 2.Whether the delay of about fifty-six days in filing the notice of appeal was inordinate and whether the reasons given excuse it
- 3.Whether the respondent would suffer prejudice if the extension is granted
Key legal issues
#Extension of time under Rule 4
A delay of about fifty-six days was not overly inordinate and was excusable where the applicant was not served with notice of the delivery date of the ex-parte judgment.
The court found no evidence of service of the notice informing parties of the delivery date, so the applicant's assertion of unawareness was believable. The delay of about fifty-six days after the notice of appeal fell due was held not overly inordinate given the plausible explanation.
Weight of the merits of the intended appeal
Lack of merit of the intended appeal is not a decisive factor on an extension-of-time application in the circumstances of the case.
The court declined to reflect on the merits of the intended appeal, holding that the respondent would have an opportunity to demonstrate lack of merit before the bench that hears the appeal. The considerations of delay, reasons and prejudice carried greater weight.
Prejudice to the respondent
Where the respondent has not demonstrated weighty, infirming or uncompensable prejudice, the application should lean towards being allowed.
The court noted that the respondent had not shown it would suffer prejudice that was weighty, infirming or incapable of compensation if leave were granted, and accordingly allowed the motion.
Legal principles established
#- The Rule 4 discretion to extend time is exercised on well-known considerations: length of delay, reasons for delay, chances of the appeal succeeding, and degree of prejudice to the respondent.
Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted to the applicant to file an appeal out of time
- 2.The applicant to file and serve a notice of appeal within fourteen (14) days
- 3.The applicant to file and serve the record of appeal within forty-five (45) days of filing and service of the notice of appeal
- 4.Costs of the application to be in the intended appeal
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya
- Civil Suit No. E287 of 2022
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022
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 power granted to this Court under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022 to extend time limited for the doing of an act authorized or required by the rules or by the decision of the Court or of the superior court below is discretionary exercisable on well-known considerations which include the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, (possibly) the chances of the appeal succeeding if the application is granted and the degree of prejudice to the respondent if the application is granted.
Since there is no evidence of service of the notice, what the applicant asserts is believable.
Lack of merit of the intended appeal is not a decisive factor, in the circumstances of the case, in determining whether or not to grant extension of time.
In the end, I allow the notice of motion dated 30th May, 2025. The applicant shall within fourteen (14) days hereof file and serve a notice of appeal and within fortyfive (45) days of such filing and service, file and serve the record of appeal. Costs of this application shall be in the intended appeal.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya National Highway Authority v Sbi International Holdings (Kenya) (Civil Application E430 of 2025) [2026] KECA 147 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Application No. of 2025 (Notice of Motion dated 30th May 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/147/eng@2026-01-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.