Kimanzi & 2 others v Kimanthi
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that an appeal not filed within 60 days is automatically treated as withdrawn—no extra applications needed.
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 leave to file an application to strike out the respondent's notice of appeal out of time
- 2.Whether the annexed application dated 25th May 2023 should be deemed as duly filed upon payment of requisite court fees
- 3.Who should bear the costs of the application
Key legal issues
#Whether extension of time should be granted to file a striking-out application under rule 86
The application was dismissed; the court declined to entertain it, noting the applicants had not invoked rule 4 and that rule 85 already provides the remedy
The court observed the irony of applicants who failed to comply with timelines seeking an extension to enforce compliance by another party. Rule 85 contains an inbuilt mechanism: a party who fails to institute an appeal within the appointed time is deemed to have withdrawn the notice of appeal, and the Court may so order on its own motion or on application. The applicants were directed to the rule 85 route and the Mae Properties jurisprudence.
Applicability of the Civil Procedure Act and Rules to Court of Appeal proceedings
The Civil Procedure Act and Rules are not applicable to matters before the Court of Appeal
The application was expressed to be brought under sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010. The court paused to observe that these provisions do not apply to matters before the Court of Appeal, which is governed by its own Rules.
Legal principles established
#- Where a party fails to institute an appeal within the appointed time, rule 85 deems the notice of appeal withdrawn; an intended respondent need not seek extension of time to file a striking-out application
- The Civil Procedure Act and Rules do not apply to matters before the Court of Appeal
- The deeming consequence under rule 85 sets in automatically upon lapse of the appointed time
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 2nd June 2023 is dismissed
- 2.The applicants are at liberty to file an appropriate application upon addressing their mind to the provisions of rule 85 of the Court of Appeal Rules and the jurisprudence of the Court, particularly Mae Properties Limited v Kibe & another
- 3.No order as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Environment and Land Court at Machakos
- Machakos ELC Appeal No. 10 of 2017
- Jurisdiction invoked
- rule 86 and rule 85 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022 (extension of time to file striking-out application)
Relief refused
#Leave to file an application to strike out the notice of appeal out of time
The application should not be entertained; rule 85 provides an inbuilt mechanism deeming the notice withdrawn upon failure to institute the appeal within time
Deeming the application dated 25th May 2023 as duly filed
The application was found to be without merit and dismissed
Costs
No order as to costs - 'I make no order as to costs.'
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.
An intended respondent who has not filed an application for striking out within the prescribed time need not go through the gymnastics of filing an application to extend time to file an application to strike out.
I find that the application dated 2nd June 2023 is without merit, and it is hereby dismissed.
The applicants are at liberty to file an appropriate application upon addressing their mind to the provisions of rule 85 of this Court's Rules and the jurisprudence of the Court thereon, particularly the decision in Mae Properties Limited cited herein.
I make no order as to costs.
The Rules are expressed in clear and unambiguous terms and they command obedience. Failure to comply with the timelines set invites sure consequences.
Issues in the judgment
#Conflicting dates of the 2nd applicant's death recorded in the judgment
Succession cause number marked as doubtful in the judgment itself
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kimanzi & 2 others v Kimanthi", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Appeal (Application) E235 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1776/eng@2026-09-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.