Labos Technologies (K) Ltd & 2 others v HFC Ltd (Civil Application E239 of 2026) [2026] KECA 1118 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal refused to extend time to appeal because the applicants waited nearly three months and blamed missing typed proceedings, which aren't needed for a notice of 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 applicants should be granted extension of time to file and serve a Notice of Appeal and Record of Appeal out of time against the High Court's ruling of 11th February 2026
- 2.Whether the applicants gave a reasonable explanation for the delay in lodging the notice of appeal
- 3.Whether the respondent would suffer prejudice if the extension were granted
Key legal issues
#Extension of time under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules
The application fails because the applicants did not explain their delay in lodging a notice of appeal; the excuse of delayed typed proceedings is legally untenable
The court applied the Leo Sila Mutiso factors: length of delay, reason for delay, arguability of the intended appeal, and prejudice to the respondent. A notice of appeal is a standard-form document lodged without typed proceedings, so the pleaded reason was invalid. No bespeaking letter, receipts or other evidence of diligent pursuit was exhibited. The notice was dated 8th May 2026, nearly three months after the directions. Meanwhile the interim orders lapsed by non-payment and the charged property was auctioned, meaning the respondent would be prejudiced. The discretionary balance therefore ran decisively against the applicants.
Nature of the orders sought to be appealed
The respondent argued, and the context supported, that the 11th February 2026 orders were interim case-management directions rather than a final determination, and the interim orders had lapsed by their own terms upon the applicants' default in payment
The High Court directions conditioned continued interim injunctive protection on payment of Kshs.7,000,000 of arrears by 30th March 2026, failing which the statutory power of sale could be exercised. The applicants did not pay, the orders lapsed, and the property was sold by public auction on 28th April 2026 to a third party. The respondent characterized the motion as an attempt to appeal against lapsed interim directions; the court's dismissal rested principally on the unexplained delay but the lapsed and interim character of the orders framed the prejudice analysis.
Legal principles established
#- Typed proceedings are not required for lodging a notice of appeal; a notice of appeal must be lodged within 14 days of the decision and a record of appeal within 60 days thereafter
- An applicant for extension of time must give a credible explanation for the delay, considering the length of delay, reason for delay, chances of the appeal succeeding and prejudice to the respondent
Court orders
#- 1.The Motion for extension of time is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the Motion awarded to the respondent
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya
- HCCOMM/E726/2025
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules (extension of time)
Relief refused
#Extension of time to file and serve Notice of Appeal and Record of Appeal out of time
Inordinate and unexplained delay; proceedings are not required to lodge a notice of appeal; no step taken towards appeal; respondent would be prejudiced as the mortgaged property was sold and recovery of a substantial balance is outstanding
Costs
Costs of the Motion to the respondent: "The applicants are not entitled to my exercise of discretion in their favour in those circumstances the circumstances and the Motion fails and I dismiss it with costs to the respondent."
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.
It is not necessary for proceedings to be available to enable a party to lodge a notice of appeal. A notice of appeal is a standard document whose form is set out in the Court of Appeal Rules.
I think in the circumstances there is inordinate delay which is not explained.
The applicants are not entitled to my exercise of discretion in their favour in those circumstances the circumstances and the Motion fails and I dismiss it with costs to the respondent.
Issues in the judgment
#The intended appeal targets a decision dated 11th February 2026 with a mention fixed for 6th May 2026, yet the undelivered-lodged notice of appeal is dated 8th May 2026 and judgment is dated 2026 - dates appear internally consistent but the string 'due to the delay in obtaining proceedings' is the only reason offered, while the affidavit asserts typed proceedings are not needed; this is a party dispute, not a judgment contradiction
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Labos Technologies (K) Ltd & 2 others v HFC Ltd (Civil Application E239 of 2026) [2026] KECA 1118 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Application (rule 4) arising from HCCOMM/E726/2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1118/eng@2026-06-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.