Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedNotice of Motion dated 16th October 2024 (Court of Appeal)

Quandji v Bank of India & 2 others (Civil Application E284 of 2025) [2026] KECA 131 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
30 January 2026
648 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal allowed a very late appeal because the delay was explained and the other side showed no prejudice.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a single-judge decision of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi, delivered by F. Tuiyott, JA, on 30th January 2026, on an unstated notice of motion dated 16th October 2024 brought under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules seeking leave to file a notice of appeal and appeal out of time. The judgment the applicant sought to challenge was delivered by Lady Justice Grace Nzioka of the High Court on 13th July 2020. The applicant explained the delay by the inaction of his former advocates, M/s Osundwa & Co. Advocates, whose offices closed during the Covid-19 pandemic; his discovery of the judgment in September 2020; and severe illness from 2021 requiring him to return to Cameroon for medical care, supported by medical reports. The respondents filed no response or submissions, so the application was unopposed. The court restated the classic Rule 4 factors from Leo Sila Mutiso v Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi: length of delay, reasons for delay, chances of appeal succeeding, and prejudice to the respondent. Finding the delay explained and no prejudice proved or alleged, the court excused the lengthy delay and allowed the motion with no order as to costs, directing that the notice of appeal be filed and served within fourteen days and the record of appeal within forty-five days thereafter.

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 a notice of appeal and appeal out of time under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the prolonged delay in filing the notice of appeal should be excused

Holding

The delay, though prolonged, was excused because it was explained by the inaction of past advocates and the applicant's illness, the application was unopposed, and no prejudice to the respondents was shown.

Reasoning

The court applied the established Rule 4 factors from Leo Sila Mutiso v Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi. The delay was attributed to former advocates' inaction compounded by the Covid-19 closure of their offices, and to the applicant's severe illness requiring him to return to Cameroon. Medical reports corroborated the illness. The respondents neither opposed nor filed submissions, so no prejudice was proved or alleged, and the court excused the lengthy delay.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A single judge considering a Rule 4 extension-of-time application is guided by four considerations: the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the chances of the appeal succeeding, and the degree of prejudice to the respondent.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated 16th October 2024 is allowed with no order as to costs
  2. 2.The notice of appeal shall be filed and served within fourteen (14) days of the order
  3. 3.The record of appeal shall be filed within forty-five (45) days thereafter

The bench

#

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

majority

Wrote the judgment

On appeal from
High Court of Kenya
null
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules

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.

They are: the length of the delay; the reasons for the delay; (possibly) the chances of the appeal succeeding if the application is granted; and the degree of prejudice to the respondent if the application is granted.
p. 2Rule 4 extension of time - guiding considerations
For this reason, the Court will excuse the lengthy delay.
p. 2Excuse of prolonged delay where no prejudice shown
The notice of motion of 16th October 2024 is hereby allowed with no order as to costs. The notice of appeal shall be filed and served within fourteen (14) days of this order and thereafter, the record of appeal within forty-five (45) days.
p. 2Final orders

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The judgment refers to 'the respondents' and 'the submission filed on behalf of the applicant' but the respondents are never named in the judgment.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Quandji v Bank of India & 2 others (Civil Application E284 of 2025) [2026] KECA 131 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Notice of Motion dated 16th October 2024 (Court of Appeal). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/131/eng@2026-01-30

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