Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCStruck OutNot stated in the judgment· [2015] KEELRC 623 (KLR)

Mutia Muindi t/a Mutibra Auctioneers v CFC Stanbic Bank Ltd Garnishee & another [2015] KEELRC 623 (KLR)

Industrial Court of Kenya (now Employment and Labour Relations Court)
31 July 2015
2,565 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~10 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court struck out an appeal against auctioneer costs because it was filed days late without first asking for extra time.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an appeal by a Garnishee (appellant) against a decision of the Deputy Registrar of the Industrial Court at Mombasa taxing an auctioneer's bill of costs at Kshs.21,763,126.00. The bill arose after the court issued a Garnishee Order Absolute on 7.11.2014 in Industrial Case No. 116 of 2013 for Kshs.267,819,043.20; the auctioneer proclaimed attachment on 13.11.2014, the appellant paid the decretal sum less auctioneers' costs, and the auctioneer later filed his bill, taxed on 1.4.2015. The appellant challenged the taxation on three grounds: that the Taxing Officer failed to consider relevant matters, violated natural justice by refusing an adjournment, and awarded manifestly excessive costs contrary to the Auctioneers Act and its Rules. The respondents opposed, contending the appeal was filed 12 days after the decision, outside the 7-day limitation in Rule 55(5) of the Auctioneers Rules, and that the taxation was regular. The court framed three issues: time bar, excessiveness of costs, and breach of natural justice. It held only on the first: the appeal filed on 13.4.2015 was out of time; the appellant's attempt to exclude Easter holidays and a Sunday failed because Order 50 rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules excludes such days only for periods of 6 days or less; and no leave to enlarge time had been sought or obtained. Since time bar extinguishes the court's authority, the court struck out the appeal without reaching the merits, awarded costs to the Respondents, and separately observed that the record of appeal was incomplete for want of typed proceedings and the ruling, though that was not the basis of the striking out.

Key legal issues

#
01

Time bar and jurisdiction

Holding

The appeal filed on 13.4.2015 against a decision of 1.4.2015 was out of time under Rule 55(5) of the Auctioneers Rules; no leave to enlarge time was sought, so the court lacked authority to hear the appeal.

Reasoning

Rule 55(5) allows only 7 days to appeal against taxation of an auctioneer's bill. The decision was delivered on 1.4.2015 and the appeal lodged on 13.4.2015. The appellant's excuse that two Easter holidays and a Sunday should be excluded failed because Order 50 rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules excludes such days only where the period is 6 days or less. Time bar is procedural and substantive and extinguishes the court's authority; no extension of time was sought or obtained, so the appeal had to be struck out.

p. 5
02

Excessive quantum of taxed costs

Holding

Not determined; the appeal was struck out for time bar before the merits were reached.

Reasoning

The appellant argued the taxed sum of Kshs.21,763,126.00 was manifestly excessive contrary to the Auctioneers Act and its Rules, relying on the fourth schedule. The respondents relied on authority that a taxing officer's decision should not be disturbed absent an error of principle or manifestly excessive fee. However, because the court found the appeal time barred and therefore outside its jurisdiction, it did not rule on the quantum of costs.

p. 1
03

Alleged breach of natural justice (refusal of adjournment)

Holding

Not determined; the appeal was struck out for time bar.

Reasoning

The appellant complained that the Deputy Registrar's refusal of an adjournment denied her a fair hearing and that reasons for objections to the bill were not recorded. The respondents contended the appeal was not the proper forum for that complaint. The court did not adjudicate this ground because it held the appeal was time barred and struck out on jurisdictional grounds.

p. 3
04

Completeness of the record of appeal

Holding

The appeal as filed was incomplete for want of typed proceedings and the impugned ruling, though this was not the ground for striking out.

Reasoning

The 1st Respondent pointed out that the appeal lacked the typed proceedings and the impugned ruling. The court agreed the record was incomplete, observing that an appellant must always prepare a complete record of appeal. However, it noted the default may have been caused by the Deputy Registrar's delay in supplying the documents, and treated these as issues of form not warranting striking out on their own.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • Courts lack jurisdiction to entertain time-barred suits or appeals unless leave to enlarge time is sought and granted; time bar goes to jurisdiction
  • An appeal against taxation of auctioneers costs must be filed within 7 days of the decision under Rule 55(5) of the Auctioneers Rules
  • Public holidays and Sundays are only excluded from computation when the period allowed is 6 days or less
  • A court must decline jurisdiction where the appeal stands outside the statutorily prescribed time without prior leave

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal herein is struck out for being time barred
  2. 2.Costs to the Respondents
On appeal from
Industrial Court of Kenya (Deputy Registrar, Taxing Officer)
Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 2 of 2015
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 12 of the Industrial Court Act and Rule 8 of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules read with Section 55(5) of the Auctioneers Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mutia Muindi t/a Mutibra Auctioneers v CFC Stanbic Bank Ltd Garnishee & another [2015] KEELRC 623 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/623/eng@2015-07-31

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