Charles Karathe Kiarie & 2 others v Administrator of the Estate of John Wallace Mathare (Deceased) & 2 others
The bottom line
#Supreme Court dismisses review, ruling unexplained delays in filing references are unreasonable.
What this practically means
#Charles Karathe Kiarie asked the Supreme Court to review a single judge's decision that dismissed his request for more time to file references. The full Court said a review is not an appeal; it only corrects obvious errors. The Court found his 27- and 30-day delays unreasonable because references must be filed within 7 days. Since he didn't explain the delays well, the review was dismissed.
Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the delays in filing the two References in this Court have been satisfactorily explained.
- 2.Whether interference with the decision of the single Judge in this matter is warranted.
Key legal issues
#Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review a decision of a single judge on an application for extension of time.
The Court has jurisdiction to review such a decision, but the review is limited to correcting errors apparent on the face of the record or where the judge acted whimsically or misdirected himself, not as an appeal.
The Court distinguished review from an appeal, stating that a review is not meant to grant an applicant a second bite at the cherry. It is a limited remedy focused on the decision of the single judge, not the merits of the substantive application. The Court relied on its decision in Parliamentary Service Commission v. Wambora & Others to affirm that interference with a single judge's discretion is permitted only in exceptional circumstances, such as where the judge acted whimsically or misdirected himself, causing a manifestly wrong decision and apparent injustice.
Whether the Applicant satisfactorily explained the delays in filing the references.
The Applicant did not satisfactorily explain the delays of 27 days and 30 days, which were unreasonable given the 7-day period for filing such references.
The Court considered the history of the matter, which was filed in 1995, and found that the Applicant's explanation that the delays were due to the time taken to prepare the applications was neither reasonable nor credible. The Court agreed with the single judge's finding that the delays were not satisfactorily explained, and therefore the application for extension of time was properly dismissed.
Legal principles established
#- A review of a single judge's decision is not an appeal and cannot be used as a second chance.
- Interference with a judge's discretion is only allowed in exceptional cases like whimsical or misdirected decisions.
- The whole period of delay must be declared and satisfactorily explained to the court.
- A delay of 27 or 30 days to prepare a reference that should be filed within 7 days is unreasonable.
- The Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review but limited to correcting errors on the face of the record.
Court orders
#- 1.The Application dated 27th Feb 2020 is hereby dismissed.
- 2.Each party shall bear its own costs of the application.
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Supreme Court of Kenya (single judge)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 163 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010; Rules 21, 49(2) and 53 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2012
Relief refused
#Extension of time for filing a Review application against the decision of S.C. Wanjala, SCJ delivered on 17th December 2019.
The Applicant did not satisfactorily explain the two delays of 27 and 30 days respectively.
Varying and reviewing the decision of S.C. Wanjala, SCJ delivered on 17th December 2019 disallowing extension of time for filing the References on taxation.
The application for review was dismissed due to the unsatisfactory explanation of delay.
Costs
Each party shall bear its own costs of the application.
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.
A review of the decision of a single judge is not an appeal as there can be no appeal from the decision of a single judge of this Court to the full Court.
Given the period of 7 days within which such references should be filed, the 27 and 30 days respectively taken to prepare the two References is unreasonable.
The Application dated 27th Feb 2020 is hereby dismissed.
Each party shall bear its own costs of the application.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Review is not an appeal
When challenging a single judge's ruling on extension of time, frame it as a review for error on the face of the record, not an appeal. Ensure you fully explain every day of delay—courts will not accept vague excuses like 'time to prepare.' A 27-day delay on a 7-day timeline is presumptively unreasonable.
Act promptly on court deadlines
If your business is involved in litigation, treat court timelines as strict. Delays of even a few weeks can be fatal. The Supreme Court expects you to file references within 7 days. If you need more time, you must provide a clear, credible explanation for every day of delay—blaming the registry is not enough.
Don't rely on registry delays
If you are an individual litigant, do not assume that delays caused by the court registry will automatically excuse your late filing. The court expects you to follow up and act promptly. In this case, the applicant's claim that the registry failed to supply proceedings was not accepted as a valid reason for a 30-day delay.
Frequently asked questions
#Can I appeal a single judge's decision in the Supreme Court of Kenya?+
No, you cannot appeal a single judge's decision. You can only apply for a review if there is an error on the face of the record or the judge acted whimsically. The Supreme Court will not give you a second chance to argue your case.
What is the time limit for filing a reference in the Supreme Court of Kenya?+
The time limit is 7 days. If you miss this deadline, you must apply for extension of time and explain every day of delay. A delay of 27 or 30 days is considered unreasonable unless fully justified.
How do I get an extension of time in the Supreme Court of Kenya?+
You must file an application explaining the entire period of delay. The court will assess whether the delay is reasonable and whether you have a good reason. In this case, a 27-day delay was not explained well, so the extension was denied.
Can the Supreme Court review its own single judge's decision in Kenya?+
Yes, but only in limited circumstances: to correct an error on the face of the record or if the judge acted whimsically, causing a manifestly wrong decision. It is not a second appeal and does not allow re-arguing the case.
Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission v Kiptoo & 3 others (Environment and Land Case E009 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 4327 (KLR)[2026] KEELC 4327 (KLR)30 Jun 2026applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Charles Karathe Kiarie & 2 others v Administrator of the Estate of John Wallace Mathare (Deceased) & 2 others", Case Analysis (2020). Civil Application 4 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.orghttps://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kesc/2020/37/eng@2020-08-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.