Eskuku v Republic (Criminal Application E008 of 2026) [2026] KECA 1206 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal dismissed an out-of-time appeal application because the applicant blamed court delays without explaining his own role in the delay.
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 has satisfactorily explained the delay so as to merit leave to file an appeal out of time
- 2.Whether the delay attributed to the High Court in supplying typed proceedings and judgment is a sufficient basis for enlarging time
Key legal issues
#Whether the applicant's explanation for the delay justified an extension of time
The application was unmerited because the applicant failed to satisfactorily explain the delay; blame attributed to the High Court was bare and unexplained as to his own role.
The court applied the Salat principles: extension of time is an equitable remedy available only to a deserving party who lays a basis to the court's satisfaction. The applicant did not disclose the date of the judgment appealed from, did not explain the failure to file a notice of appeal (which needs no proceedings), did not state when he applied for or was supplied with proceedings, and merely shifted blame to the High Court. The delay was therefore unexplained and the discretion could not be exercised in his favour.
Legal principles established
#- An order enlarging time for filing an appeal is not a right but an equitable remedy that must be earned by a deserving applicant who lays a basis for the delay to the satisfaction of the court.
- A litigant cannot rely solely on the court's delay in supplying proceedings; he must explain his own role in the delay, including why no notice of appeal was filed, since a notice of appeal does not require the judgment or proceedings.
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion dated 10th March 2026 seeking leave to file an appeal out of time is dismissed
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Lodwar
- Criminal Appeal No. 44 of 2017
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent discretion to extend time for filing an appeal (extension-of-time application under the applicable appellate procedure rules; no specific provision quoted in the ruling)
Relief refused
#Leave to file an appeal out of time against the decision in Lodwar High Court Criminal Appeal No. 44 of 2017
The applicant failed to satisfactorily explain the delay; he did not indicate the date of the judgment, did not explain why he did not file a notice of appeal, did not state when he applied for or received proceedings, and merely shifted blame to the High Court
Costs
No costs order was made in the ruling.
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.
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;
What he has done is to shift blame to the High Court without explaining his role in the delay. He has therefore failed to satisfactorily explain the cause of the delay in filing an appeal.
In the circumstances, I find the application to be unmerited and dismiss it.
Issues in the judgment
#The date of delivery of the High Court decision sought to be appealed is not stated in the ruling, making the length of the delay unascertainable from the judgment.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Eskuku v Republic (Criminal Application E008 of 2026) [2026] KECA 1206 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Criminal Application (Eldoret) - notice of motion dated 10th March 2026, arising from Lodwar High Court Criminal Appeal No. 44 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1206/eng@2026-06-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.