Moses Shivachi Shikali v Republic [1999] KECA 34 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that if your case is decided without you being heard, you can get extra time to appeal.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time within which to file an appeal, given that the appeal was heard and determined in his absence
Key legal issues
#Extension of time where the appeal was determined in the applicant's absence
The application for extension of time was allowed because the applicant's right to a fair hearing was violated when the appeal was heard and determined without him
The court reasoned that hearing and determining an appeal in the absence of a party deprives that party of a fair and impartial trial, a constitutional right. That violation constituted a legitimate grievance which justified the discretionary relief of extending time by thirty days for filing the appeal.
Legal principles established
#- Where an appeal is heard and determined in the absence of a party, that party has a legitimate grievance and their constitutional right to a fair and impartial trial is violated, justifying extension of time
Court orders
#- 1.Extension of time for filing an appeal by thirty days from 18 March 1999
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to extend time for filing an appeal (provision not stated in the judgment)
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.
As the appeal was heard and determined in the absence of the applicant he has a legitimate grievance. His constitutional right a fair and impartial trial was violated.
Accordingly, I allow this application and extend the time for filing an appeal by thirty days from today.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment as supplied is a short ruling extract; the case title, case number, parties' names and the decision appealed from are not stated, limiting full identification
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Moses Shivachi Shikali v Republic [1999] KECA 34 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1999). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1999/34/eng@1999-03-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.