Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedMiscellaneous Application 47 of 2021· [2022] KEELC 13788 (KLR)

Almudy v Ponda as holder of Power of Attorney for Uberti Maria Grazia & another

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
26 October 2022
1,113 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court refused to extend time to appeal because a 10-month delay was unexplained, showing courts will not accept missing court documents as an excuse.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Malindi (M.A. Odeny, J) determined a Notice of Motion dated November 10, 2021 by Ali Omar Almudy seeking extension of time to file and serve a record of appeal and a stay of proceedings in Malindi MCELC No. 41 of 2020, pending an intended appeal against a ruling delivered on February 5, 2021 by Hon. W. Chepseba on a preliminary objection. The Applicant, through counsel Gicharu Kimani, attributed the delay to late certification of proceedings and relied on section 95 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 42 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The 1st Respondent, through counsel Samuel Odhiambo Eliakim, opposed the application as unmeritorious, citing inordinate and unexplained delay. The court framed two issues: whether the Applicant met the threshold for stay of proceedings and extension of time. Applying section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act, the court found the 30-day period lapsed on March 7, 2021, yet the Applicant only requested certified proceedings on March 18, 2021, and attached no certificate of delay. Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in County Executive of Kisumu v County Government of Kisumu, the court held that delay in obtaining typed proceedings is not a panacea for delay, concluded the Applicant was indolent and the intended appeal an afterthought, and dismissed the application with costs to the Respondent, holding there were no proceedings to be stayed once the extension-of-time limb failed.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Applicant satisfied section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act for admission of an appeal out of time

Holding

The application failed; the Applicant did not show good and sufficient cause for the delay of about 10 months beyond the 30-day period.

Reasoning

The impugned ruling was delivered on February 5, 2021 and the 30-day period lapsed on March 7, 2021. The Applicant only requested certified proceedings by letter dated March 18, 2021, after the period had lapsed, and attached no certificate of delay. The court found indolence and concluded the intended appeal was an afterthought, relying on the Supreme Court's guidance in County Executive of Kisumu.

p. 3
02

Whether stay of proceedings in the subordinate court suit should be granted

Holding

Stay of proceedings was refused because the extension-of-time limb failed, leaving no appeal to be preserved.

Reasoning

The court reasoned that once the application for extension of time to file and serve the record of appeal was dismissed, there was no pending appeal in respect of which proceedings in Malindi MCELC No. 41 of 2020 could be stayed. The stay application was therefore moot and the entire Notice of Motion was dismissed with costs to the Respondent.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Delay in obtaining typed proceedings is not automatically a sufficient explanation for delay in filing an appeal; each case must be assessed on its own merits.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated November 10, 2021 is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the application to the Respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSection 79G
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 95
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 rule 6(1) and (3)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 21 [1]

Cases cited (5)

  • Mukunya Mugo A & another v Elizabeth Mugure Mukunya
    [2019] eKLR

    Conditions for stay of execution pending appeal under Order 42 rule 6

  • Andrew Kiplagat Chemaringo v Paul Kipkorir Kibet
    [2018] eKLR

    Extension of time principles

  • Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salata v IEBC & 7 others
    [2014] eKLR

    Extension of time principles

  • Charles Karuri Mbutu v Samuel Muhoro
    Nbi Civil App. No. 51 of 1999

    Extension of time principles

  • County Executive of Kisumu v County Government of Kisumu & 8 others
    [2017] eKLR

    Delay in obtaining typed proceedings is not a prima facie panacea for delay

On appeal from
Chief Magistrate's Court at Malindi
Malindi MCELC No. 41 of 2020
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 79G and 95 of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 42 rule 6(1) and (3) of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Almudy v Ponda as holder of Power of Attorney for Uberti Maria Grazia & another", Case Analysis (2022). Miscellaneous Application 47 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/13788/eng@2022-10-26

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