Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedELC Case (Kerugoya), Notice of Motion dated 22nd July 2020, arising from Kerugoya CM's ELC Case No. 4 of 2019· [2020] KEELC 502 (KLR)

Anthony Karimi Kamicha v Francis Karimi Kamicha (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 13 of 2020) [2020] KEELC 502 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court (High Court), Kerugoya
13 November 2020
1,375 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court refused to allow a late appeal because the litigant blamed their lawyer, confirming that missing appeal deadlines is your responsibility, not your advocate's.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a first-instance ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Kerugoya on a Notice of Motion dated 22nd July 2020 in which the applicant sought leave to file an appeal out of time against the judgment and decree of Hon. A.K. Ithuku, Chief Magistrate, delivered on 20th February 2020 in Kerugoya CM's ELC Case No. 4 of 2019, invoking Sections 79G, 95, 1A, 1B, 3A and 65(E) of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The applicant blamed his former advocate, M/S Ann Thungu & Co. Advocates, for failing to file the appeal, and blamed the Covid-19 pandemic for the inability of his new advocates to file promptly. The respondent opposed, arguing the delay was inordinate and inexcusable, that no evidence of instructions to the former advocate was tendered, that courts remained operational from June 2020, and that the applicant was a vexatious litigant abusing court process given a related pending suit, ELC Case No. 17 of 2020, raising the same issues. The court found a delay of about five months and held that no letter of instructions or receipt was exhibited; it took judicial notice that the Chief Justice only scaled down court operations during Covid-19 and courts remained operational. Relying on Republic vs Laikipia District Land Disputes Tribunal & 3 others (2006) eKLR, the court held that suits belong to litigants, not counsel, and that an advocate's failure cannot excuse a litigant. The application was dismissed with costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether good and sufficient cause existed under Section 79G to extend time for filing the appeal

Holding

No good and sufficient cause was shown; the delay of about five months was unexplained and inexcusable.

Reasoning

The applicant gave no letter of instructions or receipt evidencing engagement of his former advocate. Judicial notice was taken that courts remained operational during the Covid-19 pandemic, only scaled down by the Chief Justice, so the claimed court closure was untrue. A litigant remains responsible for ensuring his appeal is filed and cannot scapegoat counsel.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • An appeal from a subordinate court must be filed within 30 days, but may be admitted out of time if the appellant satisfies the court that he had good and sufficient cause for not filing in time
  • A suit belongs to the litigant and not counsel; a litigant cannot blame an advocate for failure to file an appeal and remains responsible for diligently pursuing his case

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 22nd July 2020 was dismissed with costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSection 79G
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 95
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 1A
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 1B
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 3A
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 65(E)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51 Rule 1
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 9 Rule 5

Cases cited (1)

  • Republic vs Laikipia District Land Disputes Tribunal & 3 others
    (2006) e K.L.R
On appeal from
Chief Magistrate's Court, Kerugoya
Kerugoya CM's ELC Case No. 4 of 2019
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 79G, 95, 1A, 1B, 3A and 65(E) of the Civil Procedure Act as read with Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Anthony Karimi Kamicha v Francis Karimi Kamicha (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 13 of 2020) [2020] KEELC 502 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). ELC Case (Kerugoya), Notice of Motion dated 22nd July 2020, arising from Kerugoya CM's ELC Case No. 4 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/502/eng@2020-11-13

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