Bernard Kiarie v Benson Kamau Njoroge [1986] KECA 52 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed you won't lose your appeal because your lawyer missed the deadline, provided you acted promptly once you found out.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to file a notice of appeal where the delay was occasioned by his former advocate and not by the applicant himself
Key legal issues
#Whether delay caused by an applicant's advocate justifies extension of time to file a notice of appeal
Yes. Where the delay is attributable to the applicant's former advocate and not the applicant, the applicant should not be penalised for the mistakes of his agent, and the extension should be granted.
The applicant, a layman, was outside the chambers when judgment was delivered and his advocate did not convey its effect to him. On learning of the judgment he pursued the proceedings himself and instructed new counsel. The court found the sworn affidavit credible, noted prior decisions of the court granting extensions on similar allegations of advocate-caused delay, and held that delay caused by the agent is not attributable to the applicant.
Legal principles established
#- Under rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, the court has an unfettered discretion to grant extension of time where the cause of delay does not lie with the applicant, and an applicant should not be penalised for the mistakes of his agent (advocate).
Court orders
#- 1.Extension of time within which to file the notice of appeal granted, up to April 30, 1986, validating the notice of appeal already filed out of time
- 2.Costs of the application to be costs in the appeal
- 3.Liberty to any aggrieved party to apply to the Deputy Registrar to refer the matter to the full court
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya
- Not stated in the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules
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.
Under rule 4 of the rules of this court, the court has unfettered discretion to grant extension where it is satisfied that the cause of delay does not lie with the applicant.
In that case, the applicant should not be penalised for mistakes of another person, the agent.
The time within which to file the notice of appeal is extended to April 30, 1986. The cost of this application will be costs in the appeal.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment does not state the names of the parties, the case number, or the lower-court case number; the parties are identified only as 'the applicant' and by counsel's names.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Bernard Kiarie v Benson Kamau Njoroge [1986] KECA 52 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1986). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1986/52/eng@1986-07-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.