Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedNot stated in the judgment (application under rule 87(1) and 102 of the Court of Appeal Rules)· [2026] KECA 1323 (KLR)

Hilton Mwakio Juma v Orange Telekom Kenya Ltd & 3 others

Court of Appeal of Kenya
10 July 2026
JLJ. Lesiit
1,746 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal revived an appeal filed nearly three years late, accepting that a widow's financial hardship explained the delay after her husband's death.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a single-judge application before the Court of Appeal at Nairobi, brought under rules 87(1) and 102 of the Court of Appeal Rules, seeking substitution of the deceased appellant, Hilton Mwakio Juma, with Nancy Wanja Mwangi, the administratrix ad litem of his estate, and consequential amendment of the record. The appellant had died on 5th September 2022; under rule 102(2) the appeal abated on 6th September 2023, and the application was brought some two years and nine months later. The applicant explained the delay on the ground of serious financial constraint: the deceased was the sole breadwinner, and the family had to choose between basic needs and litigation, relying on well-wishers and goodwill to obtain a limited grant ad litem. The respondent opposed solely on lateness, and complained that the applicant's counsel had failed to disclose the death and abatement when the matter appeared in court and before the mediator. Applying the test in Sila Mutiso vs. Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi (length of and reason for delay, chances of success, and prejudice), and following Charles Mbwika Musee vs. Settlement Fund Trustees on the competence of a legal representative's application, Lesiit, JA held that the delay was not inordinate and, taking judicial notice of the harsh economic times, accepted the explanation as satisfactory and unchallenged. Invoking the spirit of Article 159 and noting the pending mediation, the court allowed the application, ordered substitution and amendment of the record, and directed that costs of the application be in the cause. The decision below was not disturbed; this was an interlocutory application, not the substantive appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a financial constraint constitutes sufficient cause for the late application to revive an abated appeal and substitute the deceased appellant

Holding

Yes. The delay of two years and nine months was not inordinate, and the widow's explanation of financial constraint following the sudden death of the sole breadwinner was satisfactory and unchallenged.

Reasoning

The court applied the four-pronged test from Sila Mutiso vs. Rose Hellen Wangari Mwangi. Taking judicial notice of the harsh economic times in the country, it accepted the widow's deposition that she had to choose between feeding the family and filing the application. The explanation was unchallenged by the respondent, whose only complaint was lateness. The court also noted the pending mediation referral as good reason to allow the applicant to be heard, favouring substantive justice.

p. 4
02

Whether an application by the legal representative of a deceased party to a abated appeal is competent

Holding

Yes. The application having been made by the legal representative of the estate, it is competent, and only the legal representative may seek revival of an abated appeal.

Reasoning

Rule 102(3), which amended the repealed rule 99(3) of the 2010 Rules, permits a person claiming to be the legal representative of a deceased party to apply for revival of an abated appeal where prevented by sufficient cause. Relying on Charles Mbwika Musee vs. Settlement Fund Trustees, the court confirmed that only the legal representative may move the court for revival; the applicant held a limited grant ad litem obtained for that purpose.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Once an appeal abates, only the legal representative of the deceased party may move the court for revival of the appeal
  • An appeal abates if no application to substitute the deceased party is made within twelve months from the date of death
  • The test for revival of an abated appeal considers the length of delay, reason for delay, chances of the appeal succeeding and prejudice to the respondent

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order substituting the appellant, the late Hilton Mwakio Juma (deceased), with Nancy Wanja Mwangi, the Administratrix ad-litem of the deceased's Estate
  2. 2.Any reference in the record of appeal and in the appeal to the late Hilton Mwakio Juma (deceased) to be amended, as far as possible, to read Nancy Wanja Mwangi, the Administratrix Ad-Litem of the Estate of Hilton Mwakio Juma (deceased)
  3. 3.Costs of the application to be in the cause
Jurisdiction invoked
Rules 87(1) and 102 of the Court of Appeal Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Hilton Mwakio Juma v Orange Telekom Kenya Ltd & 3 others", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment (application under rule 87(1) and 102 of the Court of Appeal Rules). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1323/eng@2026-07-10

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.