Stella v Republic

Rules allows the court to exercise discretion to extend the time limited by the Rules for doing any act authorized or required by the Rules. 5. In Mungatu vs. Republic (Criminal Application E009 of 2023) [2023] KECA 671 (KLR) (9 June 2023) (Ruling), this Court held as follows: “ The principles applicable in an application for extension of time under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules have been the subject of many decisions of this Court. In Muringa Company Limited v Archdiocese of Nairobi Registered Trustees [2020] eKLR Ouko J (as he then was) stated as follows: “ Some of the considerations, which are by no means exhaustive, in an application for extension of time include the length of the delay involved, the reason or reasons for the delay, the possible prejudice, if any, that each party stands to suer, the conduct of the parties, the need to balance the interests of a party who has a decision in his or her favour against the interest of a party who has a constitutionally underpinned right of appeal, the need to protect a party’s opportunity to fully agitate its’ dispute, against the need to ensure timely resolution of disputes; the public interest issues implicated in the appeal or intended appeal; and whether, prima facie, the intended appeal has chances of success or is a mere frivolity. In considering the last principle, it must be borne in mind that it is not the role of the single judge to determine denitively the merits of the intended appeal. That is for the full court if and when it is ultimately presented with the appeal.” The Supreme Court of Kenya pronounced itself on the question of extension of time in the case of Andrew Kiplagat Chemaringo vs. Paul Kipkorir Kibet [2018] eKLR, and stated as follows: “ the law does not set out any minimum or maximum period of delay. All it states is that any delay should be satisfactorily explained. A plausible and satisfactory explanation for delay is the key that unlocks the court’s ow of discretionary favour. There has to be valid and clear reasons, upon which discretion can be favourably exercisable.” 6. I nd that the applicant has satisfactorily explained the reason for the delay in ling his appeal out of time. It is also not lost to the court that the applicant being incarcerated in prison faces challenges accessing the court registry and, hence, the proceedings and judgment. The application is, therefore, allowed. The appeal is to be led and served within the next 14 days of today’s date. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NYERI THIS 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024. ALI-ARONI ..................... JUDGE OF APPEAL I certify that this is a true copy of the original. Signed DEPUTY REGISTRAR https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2024/1876/eng@2024-12-19 2

page 2 of 2