Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment (appeal from Makueni MCELC No. E012 of 2021)· [2025] KEELC 3601 (KLR)

Munandu v Kitavi & another (Environment & Land Miscellaneous Case E002 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 3601 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
8 May 2025
961 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 gave a land dispute appellant two extra weeks to file his appeal, showing courts will forgive missed deadlines when the delay is short and well explained.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Makueni (E. O. Obaga, J) determines a Notice of Motion dated 15th January 2025 brought under Sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 95 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 50 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The Applicant, Jackson Makali Munandu, sought enlargement of time to comply with a consent order adopted on 6th December 2022, under which the parties consented to leave to appeal out of time against the judgment of 8th December 2021 in Makueni MCELC No. E012 of 2021, with the memorandum of appeal to be filed within 30 days (by about 6th January 2023). He explained his non-compliance by the 2nd Respondent's application dated 14th December 2022 seeking to set aside the consent order, which was heard and dismissed with costs on 18th December 2024; the present application followed barely a month later. The Respondents did not file replies despite service. Framing the sole issue as whether good and sufficient cause had been demonstrated, the court applied Section 95 and the familiar Thuita Mwangi/Leo Sila Mutiso guidelines (length of delay, reason for delay, chances of success and prejudice), also citing George Kianda and Waljee's (Uganda) Ltd on costs as a panacea for prejudice. Holding the delay not inordinate and the explanation sufficient, noting the annexed memorandum of appeal with thirteen grounds and the absence of demonstrated prejudice, the court allowed the application, enlarging time for filing the memorandum of appeal by 14 days, with costs of the application to the Applicant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether good and sufficient cause existed to enlarge time fixed by the consent order of 6th December 2022

Holding

The Applicant established sufficient cause; the delay was not inordinate, being barely a month after the ruling dismissing the 2nd Respondent's application to set aside the consent order, and a draft memorandum of appeal showed willingness to appeal

Reasoning

The court applied Section 95 of the Civil Procedure Act and the Thuita Mwangi guidelines: length of delay, reason for delay, chances of the appeal and prejudice. The failure to comply was attributable to the 2nd Respondent's unsuccessful application to set aside the consent order, dismissed on 18/12/2024; the present application followed within a month. A memorandum of appeal dated 22/12/2022 outlined thirteen grounds, and the unopposed application caused no demonstrated prejudice, costs being an adequate remedy.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The court may enlarge, in its discretion, any period fixed or granted by the court even after expiry
  • Extension of time is discretionary and turns on length of delay, reason for delay, chances of the appeal and prejudice to the respondent

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Enlargement of time for filing the memorandum of appeal by 14 days regarding the consent order made on 6/12/2022
  2. 2.Costs of the application to the Applicant
On appeal from
Magistrates' Court (Makueni)
MCELC No. E012 of 2021
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 95 of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 50 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Munandu v Kitavi & another (Environment & Land Miscellaneous Case E002 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 3601 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (appeal from Makueni MCELC No. E012 of 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/3601/eng@2025-05-08

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