Nairobi City County v Kariobangi Sewerage Farmers Self-help Group 1st Respondent Merab Anyango Poche & 2 others
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal gave Nairobi City County more time to appeal, ruling a nine-month delay was excusable because the county was never told of the judgment.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether a delay of approximately nine months in lodging a notice of appeal is inordinate where the applicant was unaware of the judgment and there was delay in retrieving the file from former advocates
The delay was not inordinate given the explanation offered and the unopposed nature of the application; time was extended.
Judgment was delivered on 20th June 2024 and the application filed 13th March 2025, a delay of about nine months. The court accepted that the applicant was not informed by its former advocates of the judgment and only learned of it two months later upon inquiry, and that retrieving the file further delayed the new counsel. Whether delay is inordinate depends on the circumstances of each case; a satisfactory explanation grounded in practical realities may justify it. Litigants should not be unduly penalised for counsel's mistakes.
Whether a single judge under Rule 4 may assess the merits of the intended appeal
No; a single judge does not determine with finality whether the intended appeal has merit.
Citing Athuman Nusura Juma v Afwa Mohamed Ramadhan, the court held that whether the intended appeal has merit is not an issue to be determined with finality by a single Judge; the applicant's assertion of high prospects of success cannot be definitively evaluated at the Rule 4 stage.
Whether a litigant should be shut out for the mistakes of counsel
In appropriate circumstances a litigant ought not to be unduly penalised for the mistakes of counsel.
Relying on Belinda Murai & 9 Others v Amos Wainaina and Philip Chemwolo & Another v Augustine Kubende, the court reaffirmed that blunders occur and it does not follow that a mistake by a lawyer closes the door of justice or shuts a party out from having its case determined on the merits.
Legal principles established
#- A single judge exercising jurisdiction under Rule 4 does not determine the merits of the intended appeal.
- Whether delay is inordinate depends on the circumstances of each case, and a satisfactory explanation may justify even a lengthy delay.
- The Rule 4 discretion, though unfettered, must be exercised judicially on the established principles of length of delay, reason for delay, chances of the appeal succeeding, and prejudice to the respondent.
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 13th March 2025 is allowed
- 2.The applicant shall file and serve the appeal within fourteen (14) days from the date of the ruling
- 3.The costs of the motion shall be in the intended appeal
- On appeal from
- Environment and Land Court
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022 (extension of time, exercised by a single judge)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nairobi City County v Kariobangi Sewerage Farmers Self-help Group 1st Respondent Merab Anyango Poche & 2 others", Case Analysis (2026). Application dated 13th March 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/444/eng@2026-03-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.