Kenneth Kipkurui Mibei (Suing as the administrator on behalf of the estate of the Joseph Kimibei Rotich) v Elizabeth Kilele & 3 others [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
S. ole Kantai, J.A
Judgment Date
October 23, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3

Case Brief: Kenneth Kipkurui Mibei (Suing as the administrator on behalf of the estate of the Joseph Kimibei Rotich) v Elizabeth Kilele & 3 others [2020] eKLR


1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Kenneth Kipkurui Mibei (Suing as the administrator on behalf of the estate of Joseph Kimibei Rotich) v. Elizabeth Kilele & Others
- Case Number: Civil Application No. E242 of 2020
- Court: Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Date Delivered: 23rd October 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): S. ole Kantai, J.A.
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issue presented before the court was whether to grant an extension of time for the applicant to file and serve a notice of appeal against a ruling of the Environment and Land Court, which had struck out the original suit as time-barred under the Limitation of Actions Act.

3. Facts of the Case:
The appellant, Kenneth Kipkurui Mibei, was acting as the administrator for the estate of Joseph Kimibei Rotich. The dispute originated from a parcel of land (Land Reference No. 330/507) where the plaintiff in the lower court, Fredrick Kiptonui Kilele, sought various orders against the defendants. The defendants raised a preliminary objection, asserting that the suit was time-barred. The Environment and Land Court, presided over by Eboso, J., upheld this objection on 18th June 2020, resulting in the striking out of the suit. Following this ruling, the applicant filed a motion seeking to extend the time to appeal, claiming lack of knowledge regarding the ruling's delivery date due to registry inaccessibility during the COVID-19 pandemic.

4. Procedural History:
The case progressed from the Environment and Land Court, where the suit was struck out due to a preliminary objection concerning the statute of limitations. The applicant then filed a motion in the Court of Appeal, requesting an extension of time to appeal the ruling. The motion was accompanied by an affidavit explaining the circumstances that led to the delay in filing the appeal.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered the Limitation of Actions Act, which governs the time limits for filing civil suits, and the principles for granting extensions of time as established in previous case law.
- Case Law: The court referenced the case of *Leo Sila Mutiso v. Rose Wangari Mwangi [1999] 2 EA 233*, which established the criteria for granting extensions of time, including the length of the delay, reasons for the delay, potential success of the appeal, and possible prejudice to the respondent.
- Application: The court found that the applicant's explanation for the delay—unawareness of the ruling date due to registry inaccessibility—was reasonable. The court noted that the delay in lodging the notice of appeal was adequately justified and that the respondents would not suffer undue prejudice from granting the extension. The possibility of the appeal's success was not assessed definitively but was acknowledged as a consideration.

6. Conclusion:
The Court of Appeal granted the applicant's motion, allowing him to lodge a notice of appeal within 14 days and serve it on the respondents. The ruling underscored the court's discretion in extending time limits, particularly in light of the extraordinary circumstances posed by the COVID-19 pandemic.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in this case.

8. Summary:
The Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Kenneth Kipkurui Mibei, allowing an extension of time to file an appeal against the Environment and Land Court's ruling. This decision highlights the court's willingness to accommodate procedural delays caused by unforeseen circumstances, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and reinforces the principles governing extensions of time in civil litigation. The ruling emphasizes the importance of access to justice and the need for flexibility in the legal process during extraordinary times.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

This is the end of the summary preview.