Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedNot stated in the judgment

WILDERNESS TRAILS (K) LTD. vs THOMAS NKUBITU [2001] KECA 212 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
16 May 2001
ASA.B. Shah
73 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Court of Appeal gave an applicant 30 extra days to file their appeal record, with costs deferred until the appeal is decided.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a brief ex tempore ruling delivered by A.B. Shah, Judge of Appeal, at Nyeri on 16 May 2001, in an interlocutory application for extension of time to file the record of appeal. After hearing Mr. Mahan for the applicant and perusing the application, the judge granted it, directing that the record of appeal be filed within the next 30 days. The costs of the application were made costs in the intended appeal, meaning they will be determined when the appeal itself is decided rather than awarded immediately. The certified extract contains no case title, appeal number, party names, or reasons for the decision, and cites no authorities or statutory provisions. It is a routine procedural decision of a single Judge of Appeal in chambers rather than a panel judgment, and it does not disturb any decision below; it merely regulates the filing of the appeal record. Its value for practitioners is limited to illustrating the court's willingness to grant such extensions on application and its standard practice of reserving the costs of such applications to the intended appeal.

Questions the Court framed

#

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

  1. 1.Whether the applicant should be granted leave to file the record of appeal out of time

Key legal issues

#
01

Extension of time to file the record of appeal

Holding

The court granted the application, allowing the record of appeal to be filed within 30 days.

Reasoning

The ruling records only that counsel addressed the court and the judge perused the application before granting it. No reasons are set out in the certified extract provided, so the substantive reasoning for the grant is not available from this text.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The Court of Appeal may grant an extension of time for filing the record of appeal where the application is properly presented and supported, and may make the costs of such an application costs in the intended appeal.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application is granted
  2. 2.The record of appeal may be filed within the next 30 days
  3. 3.The costs of this application will be costs in the intended appeal

The bench

#

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

AS
majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent/appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to grant extension of time for filing the record of appeal (specific provision not cited 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.

The record of appeal may be filed within the next 30 days. The costs of this application will be costs in the intended appeal.
p. 2Final orders - extension of time and costs

Issues in the judgment

#
material

The extract is a short ex tempore ruling with no case title, case number, parties' names, or reasons for the decision; the identity of the parties and the underlying appeal cannot be determined from the judgment itself.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "WILDERNESS TRAILS (K) LTD. vs THOMAS NKUBITU [2001] KECA 212 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2001). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2001/212/eng@2001-05-16

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