Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Supreme CourtAllowedPetition 17 of 2016

Speaker, Kakamega County Assembly v Malala & 2 others

Supreme Court of Kenya
13 April 2018
391 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya LawDownload the judgment (PDF) Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Court allowed a 3-month appeal delay because the explanation was honest and no one objected.

What this practically means

#

The Supreme Court ruled that a 3-month delay in filing an appeal can be excused if the reason is genuine and the other side does not oppose it. In this case, the applicant's lawyer did not know the judgment had been delivered until a clerk checked the court registry. The respondents did not object, and the court found no harm to them. The appeal must now be filed within 14 days.

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling on a Notice of Motion application dated 1st May 2016, seeking extension of time to file an appeal against the Court of Appeal's judgment in Civil Appeal No. 77 of 2014, delivered on 12th February 2016. The applicant, through Prof. Tom Ojienda, SC, explained that the 3-month delay was inadvertent because the advocate and his clients were unaware of the judgment delivery until 27th June 2016, when the court clerk visited the Kisumu Court of Appeal Registry. The respondents did not oppose the application despite being granted leave to file responses out of time. The Supreme Court, by a unanimous decision, allowed the application under Section 23(2)(b) of the Supreme Court Act and Rule 23 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2012. The court found the explanation satisfactory and the delay not inordinate, citing the precedent in Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Salat v IEBC & 7 Others. It noted no apparent prejudice to the respondents. The court ordered that the appeal be filed and served within 14 days of the ruling, with no order as to costs. The ruling was delivered on 13th April 2018 by a five-judge bench comprising Deputy Chief Justice P. M. Mwilu and Justices J. B. Ojwang, S. C. Wanjala, N. S. Njoki, and I. Lenaola.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the applicant has provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the appeal
  2. 2.Whether the delay of 3 months is inordinate
  3. 3.Whether the respondents would suffer prejudice if the extension is granted

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a 3-month delay in filing an appeal is inordinate and whether the explanation provided is satisfactory.

Holding

The court found the delay not inordinate and the explanation satisfactory, allowing the extension of time.

Reasoning

The applicant's advocate explained that he and his clients were unaware of the judgment delivery until his court clerk visited the registry on 27th June 2016, leading to a 3-month delay. The respondents did not oppose the application and were granted leave to file responses out of time but chose not to. The court, citing Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Salat v IEBC & 7 Others, held that the delay was not inordinate and the explanation was satisfactory, with no prejudice to the respondents.

Legal principles established

#
  • A delay in filing an appeal may be excused if the explanation is satisfactory and the delay is not excessive.
  • The court considers whether the other party opposes the application or suffers any prejudice.
  • Ignorance of a judgment's delivery can be a valid reason for delay if promptly acted upon.
  • The Supreme Court has discretion to extend time under Section 23(2)(b) of the Supreme Court Act.
  • No order for costs means each party bears its own expenses in this application.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion Application dated 1st May, 2016 is hereby allowed.
  2. 2.The appeal shall be filed and served within 14 days of this Ruling.
  3. 3.There shall be no order as to costs.

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

Philomena Mbete Mwilu
P. M. MwiluDCJ
Currently serving
majority
majority
Smokin Charles Wanjala
S. C. WanjalaSCJ
Currently serving
majority
Njoki Susanna Ndungu
N. S. NjokiSCJ
Currently serving
majority
Isaac Lenaola
I. LenaolaSCJ
Currently serving
majority
On appeal from
Court of Appeal at Kisumu
Civil Appeal No. 77 of 2014
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 23(2)(b) of the Supreme Court Act, and Rule 23 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2012 (as amended)

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.

The Notice of Motion Application dated 1st May, 2016 is hereby allowed.
p. 3 extension-of-time
The explanation given by the applicant is satisfactory and in the circumstances, we do not regard the delay as inordinate.
p. 3 extension-of-time
There shall be no order as to costs
p. 2 costs

Key timeline

#
2016-02-12
Court of Appeal delivered judgment in Civil Appeal No. 77 of 2014.
2016-05-01
Applicant filed Notice of Motion seeking extension of time to appeal.
2016-06-27
Applicant's court clerk discovered the judgment at the Kisumu registry.
2018-04-13
Supreme Court allowed the application, granting 14 days to file the appeal.

Practical implications

#
For lawyers

Act quickly on judgment awareness

Ensure your firm has a system to monitor judgment delivery dates, especially in busy registries. If a delay occurs, document the reason clearly and file an extension application promptly. The court values candor and lack of opposition from the other side.

For businesses

Monitor legal deadlines closely

If you are involved in litigation, assign someone to track court decisions and appeal timelines. A 3-month delay was excused here, but only because the other side did not object. Do not rely on this leniency—act within prescribed periods to avoid risking your case.

For individuals

Don't assume a missed deadline ends your case

If you miss an appeal deadline due to a genuine mistake, you can ask the court for more time. Provide a clear explanation and show you acted as soon as you learned of the judgment. The court may grant your request, especially if the other party does not oppose.

Frequently asked questions

#
Can I file an appeal late in Kenya if I missed the deadline?+

Yes, you can apply to the Supreme Court for an extension of time. You must give a satisfactory reason for the delay and show it was not excessive. The court will also consider if the other side opposes or would be harmed.

What is considered a satisfactory explanation for a late appeal in Kenya?+

A satisfactory explanation includes reasons like not knowing the judgment was delivered, as long as you acted promptly after finding out. The court expects honesty and a clear account of what caused the delay.

How long is too long to delay an appeal in Kenya?+

There is no fixed rule. In this case, a 3-month delay was not considered excessive because the explanation was credible and no one objected. Each case depends on the facts, so act quickly and seek legal advice.

What happens if the other party opposes my late appeal in Kenya?+

The court will weigh your explanation against any prejudice to the other side. If they oppose and show harm, your application may be denied. But if they do not oppose, as in this case, the court is more likely to grant the extension.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Speaker, Kakamega County Assembly v Malala & 2 others", Case Analysis (2018). Petition 17 of 2016. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.orghttps://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kesc/2018/40/eng@2018-04-13

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