Tibaingana Moses and Another v Muhsin Serwadda (Miscellaneous Application No. 271 of 2018)

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.

Holding

The High Court has concurrent jurisdiction with the Court of Appeal to grant extension of time to file a notice of appeal. Failure to receive judgment notice and counsel's unavailability constitute sufficient reasons for granting an extension of time to appeal.

Outcome

Applicants granted extension of time to file notice of appeal

Facts

The applicants sought leave to appeal out of time against a judgment delivered on 23 April 2018. They contended they were not notified of the judgment and regularly checked with the High Court but received no notification. The first applicant obtained a copy of the judgment but their lawyer had travelled out of the country and could only attend to them upon his return. The respondent opposed, arguing insufficient reason was shown and that the application should have been filed in the Court of Appeal. The court record contained no evidence of a judgment notice having been issued.

Issues

1. Whether the applicants have shown sufficient reason for their inability to file a notice of appeal in time.
2. Whether the application for extension of time should be filed in the High Court or the Court of Appeal.

Orders

• Application allowed.
• Each party shall bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (2)

• Civil Procedure Rules Order 51 rule 6
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 rules 1 and 2

Cases cited (2)

• Oscar Mugume v Metropolitan Properties Ltd (Civil Application No. 31 of 2014)
• Mugo and Others v Wanjiru and Another [1970] EA 482

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.