Kibe & 8 others v Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal excused an 18-day filing delay caused by a lawyer's legal mistake, allowing the case to proceed to the Supreme Court.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether delay occasioned by counsel's ignorance of the applicable law is an excusable reason for extension of time
Yes - the 18-day delay caused by the associate's misapprehension of the applicable rules was a blunder amounting to a mistake of law, excusable in the interests of justice.
Relying on Belinda Murai & 9 Others v Amos Wainaina, which quoted Tompkins J in White v Arthur Nicol, the single Judge held that ignorance of the law can constitute a mistake of law. Counsel took responsibility for the associate's blunder. The delay of 18 days was not inordinate, and the respondent would suffer no prejudice since it would have an opportunity to respond to the intended application.
Whether invocation of the wrong rule (rule 40, applicable to criminal matters) defeats the application
No - the applicants had properly invoked Article 163(4)(b) and rules 41 and 42; the erroneous invocation of rule 40 was a curable procedural technicality.
The respondent objected that rule 40 governs criminal matters. The Judge accepted that contention but noted the application was also anchored on Article 163(4)(b) of the Constitution and rules 41 and 42, which govern civil certification applications. Guided by Article 159(2)(d) on procedural technicalities, the error was held curable as it did not go to the root of the application.
Legal principles established
#- The discretion to extend time under rule 4 is wide but must be exercised judicially, not on whim, sympathy or caprice.
- A blunder on a point of law by counsel, including ignorance of the applicable law, may constitute an excusable mistake where the interests of justice so dictate.
- Erroneous invocation of a wrong rule does not go to the root of an application where the correct provisions are also invoked, and is curable under Article 159(2)(d).
Court orders
#- 1.Extension of time granted for filing the application for certification and leave to appeal to the Supreme Court
- 2.Notice of motion dated 24th December 2020 allowed with no order as to costs
- On appeal from
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Civil Appeal No. 440 of 2018
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 163(4)(b) of the Constitution; Rules 4, 41 and 42 of the Court of Appeal Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kibe & 8 others v Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Application Sup E413 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1808/eng@2026-09-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.