Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNanyuki Miscellaneous Suit arising from Nanyuki CM's Case No. E060 of 2023 (Notice of Motion dated 10.9.2025)· [2026] KEELC 828 (KLR)

Kamwaro v Irungu (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E008 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 828 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
10 February 2026
766 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 Nanyuki dismissed an attempt to appeal over a year late, showing Kenyan courts demand a full, honest explanation for delay.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a miscellaneous application by Notice of Motion dated 10.9.2025 in which the applicant, the defendant in Nanyuki CM's Case No. E060 of 2023, sought leave to appeal out of time against a judgment delivered on 9.8.2024 (which ordered her eviction from parcel L.R No. Laikipia Ngobit Supuko Block 2/210) and a stay of execution. She explained that the land belonged to her brother, that her application to set aside the judgment was dismissed on 13.6.2025, and that her brother's advanced age caused the delay. The respondent opposed, noting that over a year had passed since judgment, that no sufficient grounds were proffered, that the set-aside application was dated 13.12.2024, and that the applicant had not appealed within 30 days against the ruling of 13.6.2025. Applying Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act and the Court of Appeal's criteria in Peter Muriungi, the court found the delay unexplained: the set-aside application could not account for the failure to appeal in time, and even after its dismissal the present application came three months later. The court also observed that the applicant had not filed a draft pleading in support of the set-aside application, making the prospects of the intended appeal narrow. The application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether good and sufficient cause existed for filing the appeal out of time under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act

Holding

No sufficient cause was shown; the delay from the judgment of 9.8.2024 to the application of 10.9.2025 was unexplained, and the set-aside application could not excuse the delay

Reasoning

The judgment was delivered on 9.8.2024. The applicant attributed the delay to her application to set aside the judgment, but that application was dated 13.12.2024, so it could not explain failure to appeal within time. Even after its dismissal on 13.6.2025, the present application was filed three months later on 10.9.2025. Applying the discretionary factors in the Peter Muriungi decision, the delay was inordinate and unexplained.

p. 2
02

Whether the intended appeal had chances of success

Holding

The chances of the appeal succeeding were narrow because the applicant had not framed her claim as a draft pleading in the set-aside application

Reasoning

The court noted the respondent's averment that in the application to set aside the judgment the applicant did not avail a draft defence. Although the court was not reviewing the ruling of 13.6.2025, it found the absence of a draft pleading to be a grave matter bearing on whether the proposed appeal had merit, one of the discretionary factors for extension of time.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The decision whether or not to extend time for appealing is discretionary, considering the length of and reason for the delay, the chances of the appeal succeeding, and prejudice to the respondent
  • Failure to frame a claim in the form of a draft pleading when seeking to set aside a judgment weighs against the prospects of an intended appeal

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The miscellaneous suit is dismissed with costs to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSection 79G

Cases cited (1)

  • Peter Muriungi & another v Trustees, Registered Catholic Parish D.O.D Laare
    [2020] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act (leave to appeal out of time); inherent application jurisdiction of the High Court over appeals from subordinate courts

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kamwaro v Irungu (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E008 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 828 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Nanyuki Miscellaneous Suit arising from Nanyuki CM's Case No. E060 of 2023 (Notice of Motion dated 10.9.2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/828/eng@2026-02-10

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