Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck OutNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2021] KEELC 4174 (KLR)

Esther Inyanje Toloi & another v Krispinus Simiti Tembete [2021] KEELC 4174 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
23 February 2021
872 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

#

The High Court in Kakamega struck out a land appeal filed five months late without permission, and dismissed the injunction filed with it.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The appellant/applicant, claiming to be the legal representative of Plot Nos. NK/Surungai/1283 and 1284, moved the High Court by an application dated 28th September 2020 seeking an injunction restraining the respondents and an interested party from using, ploughing, planting on, trespassing on or developing the plots pending the hearing of an appeal, together with an order for the OCS North Kabras police station to maintain peace, and costs. The respondents opposed, arguing that the appeal was an abuse of due process, having been filed out of time without leave following judgment delivered on 23rd April 2020, that the interested party could not be enjoined at appellate level having not been a party in the trial court, and that injunctions could not issue on a void appeal without a stay of execution. The court, per N.A. Matheka J, considered section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act, which requires appeals from subordinate courts to be filed within thirty days of the decree or order appealed against, extendable only for good and sufficient cause. Applying Paul Musili Wambua on the discretionary factors for extension of time, and adopting the Keycorp Real Advisory exposition of the mandatory force of 'shall', the court found the appeal, filed on 21st September 2020 without leave, to be an abuse of due process. It struck out the appeal, dismissed the application as having no foundation, and awarded costs of both the appeal and the application to the respondents. Judgment was delivered at Kakamega on 23rd February 2021.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the appeal was properly filed within the statutory period

Holding

The appeal filed on 21st September 2020 against a judgment delivered on 23rd April 2020 was out of time and filed without leave, rendering it an abuse of due process

Reasoning

Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act requires appeals from subordinate courts to the High Court to be filed within thirty days, extendable only on good and sufficient cause. No leave was sought or obtained. The court, citing Paul Musili Wambua on the factors for extension of time and Keycorp Real Advisory on the mandatory nature of 'shall', found no basis to excuse the delay and struck out the appeal.

p. 2
02

Whether the injunction application could survive independently of the appeal

Holding

The application for injunction was dismissed because it was anchored on an appeal that had been struck out

Reasoning

The applicant sought injunctions restraining the respondents from dealing with the suit plots pending hearing of the appeal. Having found the appeal improperly filed and struck it out, the court held that the application had no foundation, since the injunctive relief was tied to the appeal's survival. Consequently the application was dismissed with costs to the respondents.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Every appeal from a subordinate court to the High Court must be filed within thirty days of the decree or order appealed against, and may only be admitted out of time upon demonstration of good and sufficient cause
  • The word 'shall' in a statutory provision is mandatory and imports a command or obligation

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal is struck out for having been filed out of time without leave of the court
  2. 2.The application dated 28th September 2020 is dismissed, there being no appeal
  3. 3.Costs of the appeal and the application to the respondents

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSection 79G

Cases cited (2)

  • Paul Musili Wambua v Attorney General & 2 others
    (2015) eKLR
  • Republic vs Kenya Revenue Authority, Commissioner Ex parte Keycorp Real advisory Limited
    (2019) eKLR
On appeal from
Subordinate court (Kakamega)
null
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act (appeals from subordinate courts to the High Court)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Esther Inyanje Toloi & another v Krispinus Simiti Tembete [2021] KEELC 4174 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/4174/eng@2021-02-23

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