Kenya Arab Orient Insurance Ltd v LochabTransport Ltd [1987] KECA 9 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal excluded 162 days of registry delay when computing appeal time, showing courts will grant extensions where delays are not the litigant's fault.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Exclusion of the period covered by the certificate of delay in computing time to appeal
The 162 days taken from the application for proceedings and judgment on June 5, 1986 until certified copies were available on November 17, 1986 are excluded; the applicant therefore had until January 17, 1987 to institute the appeal.
The certificate of delay filed under the proviso to rule 81(1) showed the time required for preparation and delivery of certified copies. The respondent argued the copies lay ready for 37 days before collection, but the applicant's advocate's uncontroverted affidavit evidence that the proceedings were not ready until November 17, 1986 was accepted. One of the two interlocutory applications delaying matters had been brought by the respondent himself.
Judicial discretion to extend time notwithstanding some delay
Even if the applicant's computation were wrong and the last date for filing was November 17, 1986, the court would still extend time because the applicant was not dilatory and the appeal involves a substantial claim and a genuine issue.
The judge held that rule 4 confers an unfettered discretion which must be exercised judicially. The intended appeal involved a claim for Kshs 352,703, and a live issue was whether the parties and their advocates were heard by Shields, J before judgment was given - a matter of fair hearing that deserved adjudication on appeal. The applicant's conduct was not characterized by lack of seriousness.
Legal principles established
#- In an extension-of-time application under rule 4, the delay occasioned by the preparation and delivery of certified copies of proceedings and judgment, as evidenced by a certificate of delay filed under the proviso to rule 81(1), is excluded in computing the time for instituting the appeal, and the court retains an unfettered judicial discretion to extend time even where the applicant was not wholly blameless, particularly where the intended appeal raises a substantive issue.
Court orders
#- 1.The application is allowed
- 2.Time is extended for 14 days
- 3.The appeal shall be instituted within the next 14 days
- 4.Costs of the application to be costs in the appeal
- 5.Mr Jowhal may apply informally vide rule 54(1)(b)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rules 4 and 81 of the Court of Appeal Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Arab Orient Insurance Ltd v LochabTransport Ltd [1987] KECA 9 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1987). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1987/9/eng@1987-01-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.