Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedCivil Application E093 of 2026

Cherutich (Suing as Legal Representative of the Estate of Cherutich Yego) v Board of Management Hossem Secondary School

Court of Appeal
25 September 2026
830 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal gave an estate's representative extra time to appeal because court delays, not her own fault, caused the four-month holdup.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a single-judge ruling of the Court of Appeal at Eldoret (Gachoka, JA) on a Notice of Motion dated 15th July 2026 seeking extension of time under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, read with sections 3A and 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Article 159 of the Constitution, to file and serve the memorandum and record of appeal against the judgment and decree of the Environment and Land Court at Iten (Waithaka, J) delivered on 26th March 2026 in ELC No. E006 of 2026. The applicant, suing as legal representative of the estate of Cherutich Yego, filed a notice of appeal on 14th April 2026 and promptly requested certified copies of the proceedings and decree. She made numerous follow-ups, and the proceedings and decree were only issued on 14th July 2026, with a certificate of delay and decree issued on 15th July 2026. The respondent filed no replying affidavit, so the application was unopposed. The court restated the settled Rule 4 principles from Joseph Mugambi & 2 others: the period of and reason for delay, chances of the appeal succeeding, prejudice to the respondent, effect on public administration, importance of compliance with time limits, resources of the parties, and public importance, all relevant but not exhaustive. Holding the four-month delay not inordinate and fully explained by factors outside the applicant's control, the court granted the extension and directed filing within 30 days, with costs of the application to abide the appeal.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to file and serve the memorandum of appeal and record of appeal under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the approximately four-month delay in filing the memorandum and record of appeal was excusable

Holding

The delay was not inordinate and was sufficiently explained by the delay in issuance of certified proceedings and decree, evidenced by a certificate of delay.

Reasoning

The court applied the settled Rule 4 principles: length of and reason for delay, chances of appeal success, prejudice to the respondent, and related factors. The applicant filed a notice of appeal within time on 14th April 2026, made numerous follow-ups, and obtained a certificate of delay showing the proceedings and decree were only issued on 14th and 15th July 2026. The delay was thus attributable to factors outside her control, and the application was unopposed.

Legal principles established

#
  • The factors for extension of time under Rule 4 are relevant but not exhaustive; the discretion is unfettered.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Extension of time granted to file and serve the memorandum of appeal and record of appeal
  2. 2.Applicant directed to file the memorandum of appeal and record of appeal within 30 days from the date of the order
  3. 3.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

majority

Wrote the judgment

On appeal from
Environment and Land Court at Iten
ELC No. E006 of 2025
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 3A and 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, with Article 159 of the Constitution

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 period of delay, the reason for the delay, (possibly) the chances of the appeal succeeding if the application is granted, the degree of prejudice to the respondent if the application is granted
p. 2Rule 4 extension-of-time factors
I find that the applicant deserves the exercise of discretion for the reason that the delay of about four months, which is not inordinate, has been explained.
Finding on delay
Accordingly, I direct the applicant to file her memorandum of appeal and record of appeal within the next 30 days from the date of this order.
Final orders

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Cherutich (Suing as Legal Representative of the Estate of Cherutich Yego) v Board of Management Hossem Secondary School", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Application E093 of 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1932/eng@2026-09-25

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