Laisa v Kinara
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal gave a litigant a second chance to appeal after his lawyer quit and refunded his fees, showing courts will excuse delays when blame is proven.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether blame for delay attributable to an advocate can justify extension of time
Although an advocate is the litigant's agent and the litigant bears responsibility for timely filing, conduct of the advocate that substantiates the litigant's claim of being let down (refund of fees and cessation of acting) can justify extension of time
The court noted that in normal circumstances it would hesitate to accept an explanation shifting blame to an advocate, since the advocate is only an agent and the applicant must ensure timely filing. However, the applicant demonstrated that the advocate refunded his money and ceased acting on 29th February 2024, which substantiated his claim that he was let down. Combined with his prompt efforts acting in person and an arguable appeal, this laid a good basis for the exercise of discretion.
Whether the applicant demonstrated an arguable appeal and diligence
The applicant showed through the draft memorandum of appeal that he had an arguable appeal, and through his efforts to obtain proceedings and a certificate of delay that he had diligently pursued his right of appeal
The applicant filed his application on 8th May 2024 and explained the intervening delay: he requested proceedings on 20th March 2024, paid for them online on 18th April 2024, received them but was not issued a certificate of delay. The court found he had tried his best to exercise his right of appeal and that his draft memorandum showed an arguable appeal, making it fair and just to grant the extension.
Legal principles established
#- Extension of time is not a right of a party but an equitable remedy available only to a deserving party at the discretion of the Court
Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted to the applicant to file his appeal out of time
- 2.The memorandum and record of appeal to be filed and served within 21 days from the date of the ruling
- 3.No orders as to costs
- On appeal from
- Environment & Land Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent discretion of the Court of Appeal to extend time for filing an appeal
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Laisa v Kinara", Case Analysis (2024). Notice of Motion dated 8th May, 2024 (Civil Appeal, Kisumu). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2024/834/eng@2024-07-19
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.