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 AppealAllowedCriminal Application (Extension of Time) arising from Nakuru High Court Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2020

Mutembei v Republic (Criminal Application E096 of 2025) [2026] KECA 834 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
30 April 2026
309 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 in Nakuru allowed a convicted robber more time to file his appeal because his relatives' financial struggles caused the delay.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By an application dated 9th December 2025, Peter Mbaabu Mutembei sought extension of time to appeal out of time against the judgment of Matheka, J. in Nakuru High Court Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2020, in which he had been convicted of robbery with violence. He explained that he had relied on relatives to lodge his appeal but they did not do so due to financial constraints. The respondent filed submissions dated 29th April 2026 agreeing that the delay was not inordinate and conceding to the application. Mativo, JA, sitting at Nakuru, reasoned that Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022 confers immense discretion on the Court to enlarge time, to be exercised judicially and not capriciously, with the interests of justice as the guiding principle. Relying on Andrew Kiplagat Chemaringo v Paul Kipkorir Kibet [2018] eKLR, the court reiterated that the law sets no minimum or maximum period of delay and that a plausible and satisfactory explanation for delay is the key that unlocks the Court's discretionary favour. Finding the explanation satisfactory and the delay unopposed, the court exercised its discretion in the applicant's favour and directed him to file his notice of appeal within 14 days and the memorandum and record of appeal within 45 days. This is a single-judge interlocutory ruling; it does not disturb the High Court's decision, which remains subject 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 extension of time to appeal out of time against the judgment of the High Court
  2. 2.Whether the delay in filing the appeal has been satisfactorily explained

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether extension of time to appeal out of time should be granted

Holding

Yes. The Court has wide discretion under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022, to be exercised judicially and guided by the interests of justice; the delay was not inordinate and the respondent conceded the application.

Reasoning

The applicant was convicted of robbery with violence and relied on relatives to lodge his appeal, who failed to do so due to financial constraints. The respondent filed submissions agreeing that the delay was not inordinate and conceding to the application. Applying the principles that any delay must be satisfactorily explained and that a plausible and satisfactory explanation unlocks the Court's discretionary favour, the judge found it just to enlarge time and granted specific filing timelines.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Extension of time under Rule 4 is governed by the interests of justice and any delay must be satisfactorily explained; discretion must be exercised judicially, not capriciously

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The applicant to file his notice of appeal within the next 14 days
  2. 2.The applicant to file the memorandum of appeal and the record of appeal within 45 days from the date of the ruling

The bench

#

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

majority

Wrote the judgment

On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nakuru
Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2020
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022

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 law does not set out any minimum or maximum period of delay. All it states is that any delay should be satisfactorily explained. A plausible and satisfactory explanation for delay is the key that unlocks the Court’s fiow of discretionary favour. There has to be valid and clear reasons upon which discretion can be favourably exercisable.
p. 1Principles governing extension of time
I direct the applicant to file his notice of appeal within the next 14 days and the memorandum of appeal and the record of appeal within 45 days from today. Orders accordingly.
p. 2Final orders / disposition

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The judgment attributes the Chemaringo citation to the Supreme Court, though the citation itself is simply '[2018] eKLR' and the passage is quoted without indication of the deciding court within this ruling

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mutembei v Republic (Criminal Application E096 of 2025) [2026] KECA 834 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Criminal Application (Extension of Time) arising from Nakuru High Court Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/834/eng@2026-04-30

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