Laare Coffee Factory (Suing Through Chairman Lawrence M’mauta) v Kaberia (Substituted in Place of the Late John Kaberia M’ikirima - Deceased) & 4 others (Environment and Land Appeal E027 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 594 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court allowed Meru County Government to file a cross-appeal late, confirming courts can extend time when delays are reasonably explained.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the general criteria for enlarging time for complying with the directions of the court has been met
- 2.Whether the criteria for granting leave to a party to lodge a cross-appeal out of time has been met
Key legal issues
#Enlargement of time to file submissions in the main appeal
The criteria under Order 50 rule 6 were met; the delay of 55 days was reasonably explained by governance instability, absence of a substantive County Attorney, and conflict of interest, and the delay was not shown to be inordinate because the 1st respondent did not prove dates of service.
The court applied the Salat criteria. It found the 1st respondent had not adduced evidence of when submissions were served, so inordinate delay could not be conclusively established. The explanation of administrative gaps between 2022 and early 2025, the absence of a County Attorney, and the CECM's conflict of interest appeared bona fide and unrebutted. Public interest in protecting trust land weighed in favour of enlargement, and no prejudice was demonstrated.
Leave to file a cross-appeal out of time
Leave was granted because no limitation period governs cross-appeals, the delay was reasonably explained, arguable issues were raised, and no inordinate or deliberate delay was proved.
The court noted the statutory silence in Section 16 of the ELC Act and Section 79G of the CPA on cross-appeal timelines, relying on third-tier superior court jurisprudence (Kenya Power & Lighting Co Ltd v Peter Langi Mwasi; Christine Aloo v Mary Ouma) that a cross-appeal must be filed within reasonable time or with leave. Delay here was partly attributable to the 1st respondent's death and substitution proceedings. The draft memorandum raised arguable issues and the explanation was accepted.
Legal principles established
#- Extension of time is an equitable remedy available only to a deserving party, requiring an explanation of the delay, absence of prejudice, and absence of undue delay
- There is no legislated limitation period for filing a cross-appeal; it must be filed within reasonable time or with leave of the court seized of the main appeal
Court orders
#- 1.The 5th respondent [the County Government of Meru] is granted leave to file a cross-appeal and to file submissions on the cross-appeal
- 2.The 5th respondent is, similarly, granted leave to file submissions on the main appeal
- 3.The cross-appeal and the 5th respondent's submissions on the two appeals shall be filed and served within 14 days from today
- 4.Costs of the application shall be in the cause
- 5.The matter shall be fixed for directions on a date to be issued at the time of rendering the ruling
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Chief Magistrate's Court at Maua
- Maua CMC Civil Case No 221 of 2017
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 50 rule 6 and Order 42 rule 32 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Section 16 of the Environment and Land Court Act; Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act
Relief refused
#Order arresting/staying delivery of judgment in the appeal
The reserved judgment date had already passed by the time the application was heard, rendering the relief moot
Costs
Costs of the application shall be in the cause
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The 5th respondent [the County Government of Meru] is granted leave to file a cross-appeal and to file submissions on the cross-appeal.
The cross-appeal and the 5th respondent's submissions on the two appeals shall be filed and served within 14 days from today.
Costs of the application shall be in the cause.
there is no legislated limitation period for filing a cross-appeal. Secondly, a party intending to file a cross-appeal should do so within reasonable time.
Issues in the judgment
#The supporting affidavit is dated '23/9/3035', an apparent typographical error for 2025
The judgment refers to the trial court holding that parcel 1171 'had encroached into' parcel 11, and elsewhere to the reinstatement of 0.66 acres 'added to Ithima/Ntunene/1711', while other passages refer to parcel 1171 - inconsistent parcel numbering
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Laare Coffee Factory (Suing Through Chairman Lawrence M’mauta) v Kaberia (Substituted in Place of the Late John Kaberia M’ikirima - Deceased) & 4 others (Environment and Land Appeal E027 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 594 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Ruling in the appeal lodged by Laare Cofiee Factory on 19/4/2023 against Maua CMC Civil Case No 221 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/594/eng@2026-02-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.