Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

High Court 2624 of 2008

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Misc. Appli. 968 of 2007 JOSHUA KYALO MATHEI………...…………………PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT -VSKENAFRIC INDUSTRIES LIMITED…………….DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT RULING In this Notice of Motion dated 14th December 2007 filed on 21st December 2007, the Applicant wrongfully described as the Appellant, has applied for leave to file appeal out of time the Judgment to be appealed from having been delivered on 17/5/2007, his application for proceedings being dated 11/6/2007, and the relevant copy of Proceedings and Judgment having been obtained on 7/11/2007. The Notice of Motion is opposed by the Respondent and on the basis of the Applicant’s own authority in the case of Janet Ngendo Kamau –versus- Mary Wangari Mwangi in the Court of Appeal Civil Application No.NAI.338 of 2002 where P.N. Waki J.A. quoted a passage from Leo Sila Mutiso –versusRose Hellen Wangari Mwangi, Civil Application No. NAI 255 of 1997 (UR) stating: “It is now settled that the decision whether or not to extend time for appealing is essentially discretionary. It is also well settled that in general the matters which this Court takes into account in deciding whether to grant an extension of time are: first, the length of the delay; secondly, the reason for the delay; thirdly (possibly) the chances of the appeal succeeding if the application is granted; and fourthly, the decree of prejudice to the responded if the application is granted;” and bearing in mind that what the Applicant has brought before me in this Notice of Motion is only the said Notice of Motion, its supporting affidavit, the letter to the Court asking for Proceedings and the reply thereof; this Notice of Motion is hereby dismissed with costs to the Respondent for the reasons that the matters which this Court should take into account in deciding whether to grant the extension of time asked for has not been sufficiently exhibited and therefore proved. Dated and Delivered at Nairobi this 21st day of February 2008. J.M. KHAMONI JUDGE

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.