Saronge & another v Samco Holdings Limited t/a Eka Hotel (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal 264 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 2486 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment Court refused to let two former employees appeal three months late, ruling their delay was unexplained and the employer had already paid the judgment in full.
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 Applicants should be granted leave to file an appeal out of time and have the attached appeal deemed as duly filed
Key legal issues
#Whether the Applicants satisfied the criteria for extension of time to file an appeal
The application was dismissed: the three-month delay was inordinate, the explanation (non-supply of typed proceedings) was unsubstantiated because the letter requesting proceedings was not proved to have been filed or paid for and was an afterthought, and allowing the appeal would prejudice the Respondent who had already paid the decretal sum in full.
The court applied the Thuita Mwangi factors. It found the Applicants failed to rebut the Respondent's allegations that the letter requesting typed proceedings was never uploaded on the e-filing portal, paid for, or served, showing it was drafted to suit their convenience. The judgment was already typed at delivery and available at the registry, so typed proceedings were not a prerequisite for filing a memorandum of appeal. Further, the memorandum of appeal, though claiming not to challenge the sums paid, in fact touched on the fairness of termination and sums declined, so granting leave would prejudice a Respondent who had complied with the judgment.
Legal principles established
#- An application to enlarge time must not be brought inordinately late and must be founded on sound and excusable grounds; the intended appeal should ideally already be filed before or with the extension application
- In exercising the discretion to extend time, the court considers the period and reason for delay, arguability of the appeal, prejudice to the respondent, importance of compliance with time limits, and effect on the administration of justice
Court orders
#- 1.The Applicants' Application dated December 15, 2023 is dismissed with costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Magistrates' Court (CMEL No. 860 of 2021)
- CMEL No. 860 of 2021
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent discretion to enlarge time to file an appeal out of time
Relief refused
#Leave to file appeal out of time and deeming of the attached appeal as duly filed
The delay was inordinate and unexplained; the letter requesting typed proceedings was an afterthought; the appeal would prejudice the Respondent who had paid the decretal sum in full
Costs
Dismissed with costs (costs to the Respondent)
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.
It is correct that an application to enlarge time to file an appeal must not be brought inordinately late and the grounds upon which the application is based must be sound and excusable.
In conclusion the Applicants' Application dated December 15, 2023 is found without merit and is hereby dismissed with costs.
Issues in the judgment
#Paragraph numbering repeats: two consecutive paragraphs are both numbered 16
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Saronge & another v Samco Holdings Limited t/a Eka Hotel (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal 264 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 2486 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Application dated 15th December, 2023 (arising from CMEL No. 860 of 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/2486/eng@2024-10-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.