Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedCause No 1253 of 2015· [2016] KEELRC 1504 (KLR)

Standard Limited v Moses Anemba [2016] KEELRC 1504 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
18 March 2016
MNMathews N. Nduma
932 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 refused to revive a late employment appeal because the seven-month delay was unexplained and the judgment debt had already been paid in full.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an application in the Employment and Labour Relations Court seeking leave to admit an appeal out of time. The appeal arose from a Resident Magistrate's judgment; the decretal sum was fully paid by the appellants on 5th March 2015. The appellants filed a High Court Civil Appeal No 145 of 2015 out of time without leave; it was transferred to this court and registered as Cause No 1253 of 2015. The applicant sought admission of the appeal out of time by application dated 1st July 2015, filed 6th July 2015, opposed by the claimant/respondent. The court framed three issues: inordinate delay, whether satisfaction of the decree rendered the appeal spent, and whether an arguable appeal was disclosed. Applying the Salat principles on extension of time and section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act, the court found the appeal should have been filed by 23rd February 2015 but was filed on 8th April 2015 without leave, with the leave application coming some seven months after judgment and over three months after filing the appeal, without reasonable explanation - inordinate delay. The court also noted the respondent had been fully paid before the appeal was filed and would suffer prejudice if extension were granted. The third issue did not fall for consideration. The application was dismissed with costs to the claimant/respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether there was inordinate delay

Holding

Yes - about seven months from judgment and over three months from filing the appeal without leave, with no reasonable explanation

Reasoning

The judgment was delivered on 23rd January 2015 and the appeal should have been filed by 23rd February 2015 under section 79G. The appeal was filed on 8th April 2015 without leave, and the application for leave came on 6th July 2015. The applicant offered no reasonable explanation for this delay, which the court found inordinate.

p. 2
02

Whether satisfaction of the decree rendered the appeal spent / caused prejudice

Holding

The respondent was fully paid the decretal sum on 5th March 2015 before the appeal was filed and stands to suffer prejudice if extension is granted

Reasoning

The court considered that the decretal sum was fully satisfied before the appeal was filed. Granting extension at that stage would prejudice the respondent who had already received full payment. This weighed against exercising the discretion in the applicant's favour.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An appeal from a subordinate court to the High Court must be filed within thirty days, but may be admitted out of time on good and sufficient cause shown
  • An intending appellant must file the appeal and simultaneously seek leave to admit it out of time; leave cannot be sought for a non-existent appeal

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application to admit the appeal out of time is dismissed with costs to the claimant/respondent.

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSection 79G
  • Civil Procedure RulesSection 79G (as cited)

Cases cited (3)

  • Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat –Vs- IEBC & 7 Others
    Supreme Court Application No 16 of 2014
  • Masoud M.Y Noorani -Vs- General Tyres Sales Ltd
    (2004) eKLR
  • Gerald M. Limelane –Vs- Joseph Kangangi
    (2009) eKLR
On appeal from
Resident Magistrate court
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act (proviso permitting admission of appeal out of time)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Standard Limited v Moses Anemba [2016] KEELRC 1504 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Cause No 1253 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/1504/eng@2016-03-18

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