Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture & Technology v Kwanza Estates Limited
The bottom line
#Filing the same request in two courts at once is an abuse of process.
What this practically means
#The Supreme Court dismissed KRA's request for more time to challenge a Court of Appeal ruling. KRA had already asked the Court of Appeal to review the same decision, but also filed a similar request at the Supreme Court. The court said this was improper—you cannot pursue the same relief in two different courts at the same time. KRA also gave a weak excuse for its delay, so the application failed.
Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicant has satisfied the principles for the grant of an order for extension of time as enunciated in Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat v. Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 7 others
Key legal issues
#Whether the applicant satisfied the principles for extension of time under Rule 15(5) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2020.
The applicant did not satisfy the principles for extension of time. The reason for delay was absurd and unpersuasive, and the applicant failed to lay a proper basis for the grant.
The court applied the principles from Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat. It found that the applicant's explanation for delay—that it was waiting for the Court of Appeal to review its decision—was not credible because the applicant simultaneously filed a similar application for review before the Supreme Court. This amounted to an abuse of process. Additionally, the applicant had not formally withdrawn the application before the Court of Appeal, and the respondent would suffer prejudice if time were extended since the appeal had already been lodged and responded to.
Whether the applicant's conduct of filing similar applications for review before the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court simultaneously amounts to an abuse of the judicial process.
Yes, it amounts to an abuse of the judicial process.
The court found that the applicant was 'trying to have its cake and eat it too' by seeking the same relief—review of the ruling on certification—before two different courts at the same time. The applicant had not provided evidence that the application before the Court of Appeal had been formally withdrawn. The court held that good order demands that the application pending before the Court of Appeal be dispensed with first.
Legal principles established
#- A party seeking extension of time must explain any delay convincingly to the court.
- Filing the same application in two different courts at the same time is an abuse of process.
- The court will consider whether the other side would be unfairly harmed if time is extended.
- An application for extension must be made without unnecessary delay.
- Public interest may be relevant when deciding whether to extend time.
Court orders
#- 1.The Applicant’s Notice of Motion dated 1st February 2024, be and is hereby dismissed.
- 2.The Applicant shall bear the costs of this application.
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- Court of Appeal
- Civil Application No. E053 of 2023
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 25(c), 50(1) and 163(5) of the Constitution; Sections 3(e), 3A, 15A, 23A and 23(2A)(b) of the Supreme Court Act; Rule 15(2) of the Supreme Court Rules 2020
Relief refused
#Extension of time to apply for review of the Court of Appeal ruling
The applicant has not laid a proper basis for the grant; the reason for delay is absurd and unpersuasive; there is likely prejudice to the respondent; and the applicant is abusing the judicial process by seeking similar reliefs simultaneously before two different levels of court.
Leave to file and serve the draft Originating Motion
The application for extension of time was dismissed, so this consequential prayer was not addressed.
Stay of proceedings in SC Petition No. E001 of 2024
The application for extension of time was dismissed, so this consequential prayer was not addressed.
Costs
The Applicant shall bear the costs of this 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.
What it has done indeed amounts to an abuse of the judicial process; seeking similar reliefs, namely the review of the ruling on certification, simultaneously before two different levels of court.
the applicant has not laid a proper basis for the grant of the application; the reason for the delay is not only absurd but also unpersuasive, in addition to the likely prejudice that the respondent may be exposed to if time is extended
The Applicant’s Notice of Motion dated 1st February 2024, be and is hereby dismissed.
The Applicant shall bear the costs of this application.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Avoid parallel filings in different courts
Do not file the same application for review or extension of time in two courts simultaneously. If you have a pending application in the Court of Appeal, formally withdraw it before filing in the Supreme Court. Otherwise, your conduct will be struck out as an abuse of process, and you risk costs.
Act promptly on court deadlines
If your business misses a court deadline, you must provide a clear, credible reason for the delay. Vague excuses—like waiting for another court to decide a similar issue—will not work. Act quickly and avoid filing duplicate requests in different courts, which wastes time and money.
Don't file the same case in two courts
If you have a legal matter, never ask two different courts to decide the same issue at the same time. Courts see this as trying to get a second chance unfairly. Always resolve one application before starting another. Otherwise, your case may be dismissed and you may have to pay the other side's legal costs.
Frequently asked questions
#Can I file the same court application in two different courts in Kenya?+
No. The Supreme Court ruled that seeking the same relief—like a review of a ruling—in both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court at the same time is an abuse of the judicial process. You must finish one application before starting another.
What happens if I miss a court deadline in Kenya?+
You can ask for more time, but you must give a clear, honest reason for the delay. The court will also check if the other side would be harmed by the delay. Weak excuses, like waiting for another court to decide, will likely lead to your request being denied.
What is an abuse of process in Kenyan courts?+
It means using court procedures in a way that is unfair or improper. For example, filing the same case in two courts at once, or making a request without a valid reason. Courts can dismiss such cases and order you to pay the other side's costs.
Does the Supreme Court in Kenya always grant extensions of time?+
No. Extensions are discretionary and only given if you meet strict conditions: you must explain the delay convincingly, apply without further delay, show no unfair harm to the other side, and sometimes consider public interest. The court rejected KRA's request because its reason was weak.
Later judgments citing this (2)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Muiruri & 2 others (Suing in their capacity as the Chairman, Vice Secretary and Treasurer of Neema Sisters Support Group) & another v Longechele & 2 others (Land Case E005 of 2024) [2024] KEELC 6848 (KLR)[2024] KEELC 6848 (KLR)17 Oct 2024
- Petrazo Limited (Formerly Brighton Limited) & another v New Oshwal Distributor Limited & 4 others (Environment & Land Case E031 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 6704 (KLR)[2024] KEELC 6704 (KLR)8 Oct 2024
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture & Technology v Kwanza Estates Limited", Case Analysis (2024). Application E003 of 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.orghttps://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kesc/2024/20/eng@2024-05-31
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.