Nyong'o and Others v A.G. of Kenya (Application 1 of 2010; Application 2 of 2010)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The Court granted the Attorney General's application for extension of time to serve the memorandum and record of appeal. The Court found that the delay was partly attributable to Court personnel who failed to issue an official receipt and did not promptly inform the applicant when documents were ready for collection. The Court held that under rule 4 of the EACJ Rules, sufficient reason must be shown before the Court's discretion to extend time arises, and that an applicant should not suffer for delays emanating from the Court itself.
Outcome
Extension of time granted; appeal permitted to proceed
Facts
The Attorney General of Kenya filed a memorandum and record of appeal on 28 December 2009 but did not serve it within the seven days prescribed by rule 90(1) of the EACJ Rules. The documents were presented to a Registry Clerk who issued only an unofficial handwritten acknowledgement, stating the Registrar was unavailable to sign. The Clerk allegedly undertook to notify the Attorney General when documents were ready but only did so on 6 January 2010. The Attorney General's clerk collected the documents on 8 January 2010 and served them on 13 January 2010. Professor Nyong'o and 10 Others applied to strike out the appeal for late service. The Attorney General applied for an extension of time, arguing the delay was caused by hardship at the Court Registry.
Issues
- Whether the Attorney General of Kenya should be granted an extension of time to serve the memorandum and record of appeal.
- Whether the appeal should be struck out for failure to serve within the prescribed time under rule 90(1) of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure, 2008.
Orders
- Application No. 1 of 2010 dismissed.
- Application No. 2 of 2010 granted.
- Time for service under Application No. 2 of 2010 deemed extended to 13 January 2010.
- Costs to be in the cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Cases cited (3)
- Wasike v Khisa and Another [2004] IKLR 197
- Abdul Aziz Ngoma v Mungai Mathayo and Another [1976-80] IKLR 75
- Boney M Katatumba v Waheed Karim (Civil Application No. 27 of 2007)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.