Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedMombasa CMELRC Cause No. E1183 of 2021 (application dated 23rd November 2024)· [2025] KEELRC 1957 (KLR)

Sheer Logistic Management Consultant v Ombui & another (Appeal 257 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1957 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
26 June 2025
OKOcharo Kebira
912 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 Mombasa employment court threw out a late appeal because the employer waited two months without a good reason — deadlines matter.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Applicant (an employer) sought leave to appeal out of time against a judgment delivered on 23rd September 2024 in Mombasa CMELRC Cause No. E1183 of 2021, in which the Respondent (the claimant) succeeded against it. The application was brought under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The Applicant explained the delay of roughly two months by pointing to a parallel suit, ELRC Cause No. E486 of 2024, involving identical subject matter, whose judgment was delivered on 28th October 2024; it argued that it awaited the outcome of the related suits and therefore delayed instructing its advocates, and that it had partially settled the claim during mediation while disputing the unfair termination finding. The Respondent opposed, contending that the delay was inordinate and unexplained, that the suits were separate and heard on different dates, and that she had already been issued with a notice of entry of judgment and draft decree after the stay period expired. The sole issue was whether sufficient cause had been shown for extension of time. The court applied the established test in Leo Sila Mutiso v Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi and the burden enunciated in Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat v IEBC. It found the Applicant's reasons general and unpersuasive, held it unnecessary to consider the other factors, dismissed the application dated 23rd November 2024, and struck out the appeal, which had been filed without leave, with costs to the Respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether sufficient cause was shown to warrant extension of time to file an appeal out of time under Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act

Holding

The application was dismissed; the delay of approximately two months was unexplained and the reasons given were general and unpersuasive, so the court found it unnecessary to consider the remaining factors.

Reasoning

The court applied the established four-factor test from Leo Sila Mutiso v Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi: length of delay, reason for delay, chances of appeal succeeding, and prejudice to the respondent. The judgment was delivered on 23rd September 2024 and the application filed on 23rd November 2024, a delay of about two months. The applicant's explanation - that it awaited the outcome of similar suits and thus delayed instructing counsel - was held to be general in nature and least persuasive. Having failed on the reason-for-delay factor, the court did not examine the other factors.

p. 3
02

Whether an appeal filed without the requisite leave should remain on record

Holding

The appeal, having been filed without leave of the Court, was struck out with costs.

Reasoning

Since the application for extension of time (leave) was dismissed and the appeal had been filed without leave, the court proceeded to strike out the appeal. This follows from the principle that an appeal filed out of time and without leave is a nullity and cannot stand on the record.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The burden rests with the applicant for extension of time to explain each period of delay and demonstrate that the delay was neither inordinate nor deliberate; where the reason for delay is insufficient, the court need not consider the other factors.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 23rd November 2024 seeking leave to appeal out of time is dismissed
  2. 2.The appeal filed without leave of the Court is struck out with costs
  3. 3.Costs to the Respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSection 79G
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51, Rule 1

Cases cited (2)

  • Leo Sila Mutiso v Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi
    [1999] 2 EA 231
  • Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat v IEBC & 7 Others
    [2014] eKLR
On appeal from
Trial court (ELRC, Magistrates' level, Mombasa)
Mombasa CMELRC Cause No. E1183 of 2021
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Sheer Logistic Management Consultant v Ombui & another (Appeal 257 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1957 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Mombasa CMELRC Cause No. E1183 of 2021 (application dated 23rd November 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1957/eng@2025-06-26

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