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 provided judgment extract

Concord Insurance Company Limited v David Otieno Alinyo & Joash Otweli Alinyo & another [2002] KECA 210 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya (sitting at Kisumu)
11 June 2002
ALA.A. Lakha
87 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

#

Kenya's High Court in Kisumu gave a losing party seven extra days to appeal, but ordered KSh 5,000 in costs paid first.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The extract provided is only the concluding portion of a short ruling delivered at Kisumu on 11 June 2002 by A.A. Lakha, J. It determines an application for extension of time within which to file and serve a Notice of Appeal. The judge, exercising discretion, found the circumstances fit and proper and extended time for filing the Notice of Appeal by 7 days, with a further 7 days to serve it. The applicant was ordered to pay Sh.5,000/= as costs of the application to the respondent within 7 days, failing which leave was granted to execute. No authorities, statutory provisions, or detailed reasoning appear in the extract, and the case title, case number, and parties are not stated. Because the extract is incomplete, no binding propositions or substantive holdings can be recorded; the only quotable material is the disposition itself. The ruling is a single-judge discretionary decision rather than a panel appellate judgment, and it does not disturb any decision below - it regulates the steps for commencing an 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 an extension of time to file and serve a Notice of Appeal

Key legal issues

#

Legal principles established

#

    Court orders

    #
    1. 1.Time to file Notice of Appeal extended by 7 days
    2. 2.7 days granted to serve the Notice of Appeal
    3. 3.Applicant to pay Sh.5,000/= costs of the application to the respondent within 7 days, after which leave is granted to execute

    The bench

    #

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

    AL
    majority

    Wrote the judgment

    Jurisdiction invoked
    Not stated in the extract; the order was made in the judge's discretion on an application for extension of time to file and serve a Notice of Appeal

    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.

    Time to file Notice of appeal extended by 7 days and 7 days to serve. Applicant to pay Sh.5,000/= costs of this application to the respondent within 7 days after which leave is granted to execute.
    p. 2Final orders - extension of time and costs

    Issues in the judgment

    #
    material

    The extract contains only the closing/dispositive portion of the ruling; the case title, case number, parties, grounds and reasoning are absent, so holdings and issues cannot be recorded.

    minor

    The coram shows a single judge (A.A. Lakha, J) delivering the ruling, so this is not a multi-judge appellate panel decision despite the appellate-style application.

    Key timeline

    #

    Practical implications

    #

    Frequently asked questions

    #

    Cite this brief

    #

    Cite this brief

    Caselaw, "Concord Insurance Company Limited v David Otieno Alinyo & Joash Otweli Alinyo & another [2002] KECA 210 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2002). Not stated in the provided judgment extract. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2002/210/eng@2002-06-11

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