Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealPartially AllowedNot stated in judgment· [2026] KECA 1227 (KLR)

Josiah Kipkoske Kirui v Michael Metet & 12 Others

Court of Appeal of Kenya
1 July 2026
JMJ. Mativo
450 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal allowed an appellant more time to file his appeal record, confirming no fixed limit exists on how much delay courts may excuse.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a single-judge ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nakuru, delivered by J. Mativo, JA, on 1st July 2026, on an application dated 2nd June 2026 brought under Rules 4, 47 and 75 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022. The applicant sought leave to file his appeal out of time and an extension of seven days to file and serve submissions. He explained that although he had filed his notice of appeal on 29th January 2026 and immediately applied for typed proceedings, the proceedings were voluminous and he could not compile the record of appeal in time. The Court noted that when the matter came up on 21st April 2026, an earlier application dated 13th February 2026 seeking stay of execution was declined, the Court having indicated that the appeal should proceed for hearing, and directions were given for filing of submissions. The respondent, though served with a hearing notice by e-mail, filed neither a reply nor submissions by the hearing date. Applying Rule 4, which permits the Court to extend time on such terms as it thinks just, whether before or after the doing of the act, and following the Supreme Court's decision in Andrew Kiplagat Chemaringo v. Paul Kipkorir Kibet that the law sets no minimum or maximum period of delay, the Court found the explanation plausible and the delay not inordinate. It allowed the application and extended time by fourteen days from the date of the ruling for the applicant to file and serve his record of appeal and submissions. No costs order was made.

Key legal issues

#
01

Extension of time to file a record of appeal and submissions

Holding

The Court allowed the extension, finding the explanation for the delay plausible and the delay not inordinate.

Reasoning

The applicant had filed his notice of appeal promptly and applied for proceedings, but the typed proceedings were voluminous, making compilation of the record difficult. Applying Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022, and guided by the Supreme Court's position that the law sets no minimum or maximum period of delay, the judge found the explanation plausible and the delay not inordinate, and extended time by 14 days. The respondent, though served with a hearing notice and the application, filed neither a reply nor submissions.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The law does not prescribe a minimum or maximum period of delay for purposes of extending time.
  • Under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022, the Court may extend time limited by the Rules or by any decision of the Court or a Superior Court, whether before or after the doing of the act, on such terms as it thinks just.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 2nd June 2026 is allowed
  2. 2.Time extended by 14 days from the date of the ruling for the applicant to file and serve his record of appeal and submissions
Jurisdiction invoked
Rules 4, 47 & 75 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Josiah Kipkoske Kirui v Michael Metet & 12 Others", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1227/eng@2026-07-01

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.