Malombo t/a OM Robinson & Company Advocates v Kainembabazi (Sued as the Executrix of the Estate of John Wycliffe Rutagyemwa Kazzora - Deceased) (Civil Appeal E066 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2416 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's High Court allowed an advocate to appeal five months late because he was pursuing review and recusal applications the whole time.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the delay of about five months in filing the intended appeal was adequately explained
The delay was explained to the satisfaction of the court and arose from factors beyond the Applicant's control
The court considered the sequence of events: within four days of the Deputy Registrar's ruling the Applicant filed a review application; after it was heard and reserved for ruling, he sought the Deputy Registrar's recusal; the recusal ruling of 27th August 2025 refused recusal and directed the review to be presented before another Deputy Registrar. The court found these circumstances explained the approximately five-month delay and that the application was therefore merited, allowing prayers 2 and 3.
The applicable principles for extension of time under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act
The court applied the Salat criteria: extension of time is discretionary and equitable, requiring an explained delay, absence of prejudice, and absence of undue delay
The court adopted the seven-factor test from Nicholas Kiptoo Salat v IEBC, including that extension of time is not a right, that the applicant bears the burden of laying a basis, that the delay must be reasonably explained to the court's satisfaction, and that prejudice to the respondent and undue delay are relevant considerations applied case by case.
Legal principles established
#- Extension of time is an equitable remedy available only to a deserving party at the discretion of the court, and the applicant bears the burden of explaining the delay
- Under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act, an appeal may be admitted out of time if the appellant shows good and sufficient cause for the delay
Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted to the Appellant to appeal the Ruling of the Deputy Registrar delivered on 11th April 2025 outside the prescribed time
- 2.Memorandum of Appeal dated 25th September 2025 admitted out of time
- 3.Applicant given 14 days from the date of the ruling to lodge the Memorandum of Appeal
- 4.No order as to costs
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya (Mombasa)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21 (inherent jurisdiction to extend time for filing appeal)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Malombo t/a OM Robinson & Company Advocates v Kainembabazi (Sued as the Executrix of the Estate of John Wycliffe Rutagyemwa Kazzora - Deceased) (Civil Appeal E066 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2416 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Notice of Motion dated 25th September 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2416/eng@2026-04-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.