Rhobi Chacha v Justus Momanyi [2020] KEELC 2420 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's High Court allowed a late appeal record to stand because the rules set no filing deadline and nobody was harmed by the delay.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether leave of court is required, and whether striking out is warranted, where a Supplementary Record of Appeal is filed more than thirty days after the order appealed against
The application to strike out was disallowed; the Supplementary Record of Appeal was admitted as duly filed in the interests of justice
The court found that Order 42 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules requires a certified copy of the decree or order appealed against to be filed but sets no time limit for a supplementary record, leaving directions to the court. The supplementary record contained all pleadings, proceedings, exhibits, judgment and order needed for proper appellate determination. The Raila Odinga case relied on by the Respondent was distinguished as concerning a late affidavit in an election petition, not an appeal record. No prejudice would be suffered by the Respondent.
Whether the Raila Odinga decision (rejecting a late affidavit) compelled striking out the supplementary record
The case was distinguished as not applicable to an appeal record
The Respondent relied on Raila Amolo Odinga, where the Supreme Court rejected an affidavit filed late, to argue the record should be struck out. The court distinguished it because this matter is an appeal in which the court requires all documents forming the basis of the lower court proceedings to be part of the record so as to make a proper determination.
Legal principles established
#- Order 42 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules does not prescribe a time within which a supplementary record of appeal must be filed; it leaves the timing to the court's directions, and such a record may be admitted in the interests of justice where no prejudice results
Court orders
#- 1.The Supplementary Record of Appeal was admitted as duly filed
- 2.The Respondent's Notice of Motion application dated 4th November 2019 was disallowed as unmerited
- 3.Costs in the cause
- On appeal from
- Kajiado Chief Magistrate's Court
- Kajiado CMCC No. 27 of 2004
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appellate jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 42 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Rhobi Chacha v Justus Momanyi [2020] KEELC 2420 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/2420/eng@2020-05-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.