Kiluwa Limited & another v Business Liason Company Limited & 3 others
The bottom line
#The Supreme Court allowed late filing of omitted court notes if explained and no prejudice.
What this practically means
#The Supreme Court gave the Applicants permission to add missing documents to their appeal record. The missing court notes were an oversight, not intentional. The Court found the explanation reasonable and said the Respondents would not be harmed by allowing the correction. The Applicants must file the notes within seven days and pay the Respondents’ costs. This shows courts may forgive procedural mistakes when the reason is honest and no one is prejudiced.
Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Applicants should be granted leave to file a Supplementary Record of Appeal to include the omitted court notes of Makhandia & Ouko JJA and the order extending time by J. B. Ojwang SCJ.
Key legal issues
#Whether the Applicants should be granted leave to file a Supplementary Record of Appeal after the initial record was found to be defective due to omission of documents.
The Court allowed the application, finding that the omission was an oversight, the explanation was reasonable, and no prejudice would be suffered by the Respondents.
The Applicants explained that the omission of the court notes of Makhandia and Ouko JJA was an oversight, as they mistakenly believed the proceedings received from the Court of Appeal Registry were sent in triplicate and included only part of the notes. The Court found this explanation reasonable and noted that the notes were necessary for canvassing claims in the appeal, providing a just opportunity to all parties. The Court concluded that no prejudice would be suffered by the Respondents if the application was allowed.
Legal principles established
#- Courts have wide discretion to allow late filings if the applicant explains the delay reasonably.
- Claiming missing typed proceedings alone does not excuse delay; each case is judged on its facts.
- Omitting documents due to genuine oversight can be corrected if no prejudice results to the other side.
- A supplementary record of appeal should be allowed when necessary for a just hearing of all parties.
- The party causing the delay bears the other side’s costs as a condition for granting relief.
- Court rules on appeal records must be followed, but non-compliance may be excused with proper explanation.
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 11th of September, 2017 be and is hereby allowed.
- 2.The Applicants shall file and serve their Supplementary Record of Appeal within 7 days hereof.
- 3.The Applicants shall bear the costs of the Respondents in this Application.
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 33 of the Supreme Court 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.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Mistakes in appeal records fixable
If you omit key documents from a record of appeal, immediately apply for leave to file a supplementary record. Provide a clear, honest explanation for the oversight—such as mistaken belief about completeness of registry records. Show no prejudice to the opponent. The court may grant relief within a short deadline and order your client to pay costs.
Procedural errors need early fix
If your legal team discovers a missing document in an appeal filed on your behalf, work with them to promptly seek court permission to correct it. Delays that are explained honestly and corrected quickly are more likely to be accepted. Expect to pay the other side’s legal costs for the correction application.
Court may overlook honest errors
If you or your lawyer make an honest mistake when filing an appeal—like leaving out important papers—you can ask the court for permission to add them later. The court will look at your reason and whether the other side is harmed. Be prepared for the judge to order you to pay the other party’s costs for the mistake.
Frequently asked questions
#Can I add missing documents to my appeal record in Kenya after filing?+
Yes, you can apply to the court for leave to file a supplementary record of appeal. You must explain why the documents were omitted and show it was an honest mistake. The court will decide based on your reason and whether the other party will be unfairly harmed.
What happens if I miss the deadline to file appeal documents in Kenya?+
You can apply for an extension of time. The court has discretion to extend deadlines, but you must explain the delay with a reasonable cause, such as an oversight or difficulty getting proceedings. Each case is judged on its own facts. You may have to pay costs to the other side.
Will I have to pay the other side’s costs if I file a late document in Kenya?+
Yes, likely. In this Supreme Court case, the Applicants were ordered to bear the Respondents’ costs for the application. Courts often impose costs on the party causing a procedural error to compensate the other side for inconvenience. This is a common condition for granting relief.
What is a supplementary record of appeal in Kenyan law?+
It is a document filed after the initial record of appeal to add missing items—for example, court notes or orders. You need court permission to file it. The court grants leave if the omission was a genuine oversight and adding the documents will help decide the appeal fairly without prejudicing the other side.
Later judgments citing this (3)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Nesco Services Limited v Kenelec Supplies Limited & 6 others (Environment and Land Case 157 of 2017) [2025] KEELC 7262 (KLR)[2025] KEELC 7262 (KLR)23 Oct 2025
- Aol v Owino & 3 others (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E008 of 2021) [2022] KEELC 2766 (KLR)[2022] KEELC 2766 (KLR)14 Jul 2022applied
- Republic v Charles Abade Warambo & 2 others Intended Exparte John Umara Ogol [2022] KEELC 985 (KLR)[2022] KEELC 985 (KLR)10 Mar 2022applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kiluwa Limited & another v Business Liason Company Limited & 3 others", Case Analysis (2019). Petition (Application) 14 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.orghttps://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kesc/2019/13/eng@2019-11-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.