Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNotice of Motion dated 11th September 2023 (arising from Nkubu PMCC No. 55 of 2018)

Kenya Power & Lighting Company Ltd v Murungi (Miscellaneous Application E004 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 3692 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
1 February 2024
2,450 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~10 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's High Court allowed Kenya Power to appeal late, ruling a short, explained delay plus an arguable appeal justifies extending time.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling on a notice of motion dated 11th September 2023 by Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited seeking enlargement of time to appeal against a judgment of Hon. Ezra Ayuka delivered on 13th July 2023 in Nkubu PMCC No. 55 of 2018, Asteria Kawira Murungi v Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited, in which the applicant was condemned to pay Kshs.421,867 plus costs and interest. The application, brought under Section 3A and 79G of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, was supported by an affidavit of the applicant's counsel, Anguche Beverline Nechesa, who attributed the delay to the lower court's administrative lapse in supplying a certified copy of the judgment (availed only on 21st August 2023) and the time taken for internal instructions to appeal. The respondent opposed, contending the delay was inordinate, judgment was delivered in the applicant's counsel's presence, and a memorandum of appeal required no certified copy or typed proceedings. Both parties filed written submissions. The court, applying the Salat principles, identified the length of delay, the reason for delay, arguability of the intended appeal and prejudice as the relevant factors. It found the delay of roughly a month beyond the limitation period not inordinate, the explanation excusable, the intended appeal arguable and non-frivolous, and held the respondent could be compensated in costs and interest. The application was allowed: leave to appeal out of time was granted, the applicant was given fourteen days to file and serve its memorandum of appeal, and costs of the application were ordered to abide the outcome of the appeal.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the court should grant extension of time to the applicant to file a memorandum of appeal against the decision of Hon. Ezra Ayuka in Nkubu PMCC No. 55 of 2018

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the delay of about one month in filing the appeal was inordinate and satisfactorily explained

Holding

The delay was not inordinate and the reason - the lower court's delay in supplying a certified copy of the judgment plus internal decision-making time - was excusable.

Reasoning

The court measured the period between delivery of judgment on 13th July 2023 and the application of 11th September 2023, finding only about one month beyond the 30-day limit. It accepted the certified copy was only availed on 21st August 2023, so administrative lapse by the registry and time taken for internal instructions justified the delay.

p. 4
02

Whether the intended appeal is arguable and whether the respondent would suffer prejudice

Holding

The intended appeal is arguable and not frivolous, and the respondent can be adequately compensated by costs and interest.

Reasoning

Applying the Salat principles, the court found the grounds challenging the entire trial decision warranted interrogation. On prejudice, it reasoned that any loss to the respondent from delayed enjoyment of the decree could be remedied by costs and interest if the appeal succeeded.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • Extension of time is an equitable remedy available to a deserving party at the court's discretion, and the applicant bears the burden of explaining the delay.
  • An arguable intended appeal need not succeed; it suffices that it is not frivolous.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Leave is granted to the applicant to file appeal out of time against the Judgment delivered in Nkubu PMCC No. 55 of 2018
  2. 2.The applicant to file and serve its Memorandum of Appeal within Fourteen (14) days hereof
  3. 3.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal

The bench

#

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

majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 21 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010

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.

I am satisfied that the applicant has satisfied the prerequisite for granting of a relief under Section 79 G of the Civil Procedure Act.
p. 5Satisfaction of statutory test for extension of time
I find the reason for the delay well explained and excusable.
p. 5Explanation for delay
Leave is granted to the applicant to file appeal out of time against the Judgment delivered in Nkubu PMCC No. 55 of 2018.
p. 5Final orders
Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal.
p. 5Costs

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The respondent argues Section 79G only empowers admission of an appeal out of time and not extension of time, but the court did not address this objection in its analysis before granting leave.

minor

The court describes the period between 13th July 2023 and 11th September 2023 as 'about one month' from the expiry of the appeal period; it is in fact about two months, as the respondent herself notes.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Power & Lighting Company Ltd v Murungi (Miscellaneous Application E004 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 3692 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Notice of Motion dated 11th September 2023 (arising from Nkubu PMCC No. 55 of 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/3692/eng@2024-02-01

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