Labos Technologies (k) Limited & 2 others v Hfc Limited
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal refused to extend time to appeal because the applicants waited nearly three months and blamed missing typed proceedings, which aren't needed for a notice of appeal.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Extension of time under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules
The application fails because the applicants did not explain their delay in lodging a notice of appeal; the excuse of delayed typed proceedings is legally untenable
The court applied the Leo Sila Mutiso factors: length of delay, reason for delay, arguability of the intended appeal, and prejudice to the respondent. A notice of appeal is a standard-form document lodged without typed proceedings, so the pleaded reason was invalid. No bespeaking letter, receipts or other evidence of diligent pursuit was exhibited. The notice was dated 8th May 2026, nearly three months after the directions. Meanwhile the interim orders lapsed by non-payment and the charged property was auctioned, meaning the respondent would be prejudiced. The discretionary balance therefore ran decisively against the applicants.
Nature of the orders sought to be appealed
The respondent argued, and the context supported, that the 11th February 2026 orders were interim case-management directions rather than a final determination, and the interim orders had lapsed by their own terms upon the applicants' default in payment
The High Court directions conditioned continued interim injunctive protection on payment of Kshs.7,000,000 of arrears by 30th March 2026, failing which the statutory power of sale could be exercised. The applicants did not pay, the orders lapsed, and the property was sold by public auction on 28th April 2026 to a third party. The respondent characterized the motion as an attempt to appeal against lapsed interim directions; the court's dismissal rested principally on the unexplained delay but the lapsed and interim character of the orders framed the prejudice analysis.
Legal principles established
#- Typed proceedings are not required for lodging a notice of appeal; a notice of appeal must be lodged within 14 days of the decision and a record of appeal within 60 days thereafter
- An applicant for extension of time must give a credible explanation for the delay, considering the length of delay, reason for delay, chances of the appeal succeeding and prejudice to the respondent
Court orders
#- 1.The Motion for extension of time is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the Motion awarded to the respondent
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya
- HCCOMM/E726/2025
- Jurisdiction invoked
- 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, "Labos Technologies (k) Limited & 2 others v Hfc Limited", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Application (rule 4) arising from HCCOMM/E726/2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1118/eng@2026-06-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.