Robert Uri Dabaly Jimma v Kenya School of Law & 1 other
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal struck out the Council of Legal Education's dormant appeal after five years of missed deadlines, ordering it to pay costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Consequences of failure to institute an appeal within the prescribed 60 days after certification of proceedings
The notices of appeal were liable to be dealt with under rule 85; having filed no record of appeal for over five years, the respondents' notices were struck out and the application succeeded.
The Court found it undisputed that the record of appeal should have been filed within 60 days of certification on 16th October 2023, i.e. by 15th December 2023, and that no appeal had been instituted more than five years later. Procedural discipline is required; enforcement of rules of practice is imperative, and default invites the consequences prescribed by rule 85. The respondents' explanations were irrelevant because the motion was not an extension-of-time application under rule 4.
Whether the respondents could rely on the certificate of delay despite failure to serve the letter requesting proceedings
The respondents' concession that the letter requesting proceedings was never served meant they could not invoke the proviso to rule 84(1) to extend the computation of time.
Rule 84(2) expressly bars an appellant from relying on the proviso unless the application for a copy of the proceedings was in writing and served on the respondent. Counsel for the 1st respondent admitted the letter was never served on the applicant, so the time-exclusion mechanism for preparing the record was unavailable to justify the delay.
Legal principles established
#- A party who lodges a notice of appeal but fails to institute the appeal within the appointed time is deemed to have withdrawn the notice, and the Court may on its own motion or on application make such order; the party in default is liable for costs arising from the notice of appeal to any person served with it.
- An appellant cannot rely on the proviso to rule 84(1) excluding time for preparation of proceedings unless the application for the copy of proceedings was in writing and served on the respondent.
- The Court's timelines and rules of procedure must be strictly adhered to; courts will not aid parties who disregard rules and timelines.
Court orders
#- 1.The notices of appeal filed by the 1st and 2nd respondents are struck out
- 2.The application succeeds with costs to the applicant
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya
- Jurisdiction invoked
- rule 85 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Robert Uri Dabaly Jimma v Kenya School of Law & 1 other", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Application (rule 85) arising from High Court constitutional petition judgment of Mrima, J. dated 25th February 2021; respondents' Notices of Appeal dated 1st March 2021 and 16th March 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1590/eng@2026-07-31
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.