Need a court document? Have an advocate prepare it.
Tell us about your dispute and the court involved. Request a document drafted for your facts, with your evidence and the relief you need.
An advocate confirms availability, scope and fees before accepting your matter.Full text of the document
Educational sample. Replace bracketed fields using your evidence.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CASE OR APPLICATION NO [appropriate reference]
[APPLICANT OR CLAIMANT] v [RESPONDENT OR DEFENDANT]
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
1. The application seeks extension of the rule-based steps identified in the motion under rule 15(2). The Applicants recognise that extension is discretionary and that they bear the burden of explaining the delay with facts in the supporting affidavit.
2. The first period is from judgment to the claimed instructions to counsel. The affidavit and supporting communication at [references] establish the explanation advanced. A payment for a different proceeding is not treated as conclusive proof of those instructions.
3. The next period concerns counsel’s alleged representations and the Applicants’ checks on filing. The submission identifies the supported date of knowledge and distinguishes awareness of the judgment from discovery that an appeal was absent.
4. The period following the proceedings-request letter is addressed separately at [references]. Earlier reliance on counsel does not explain every later month. Where the evidence leaves an interval unexplained, the Applicants acknowledge the deficiency rather than seek to fill it through counsel’s submissions.
5. Diligence after discovery is shown by [admitted records]. The Applicants explain why the proposed completion period is sufficient and identify the notice, petition and record steps still required.
6. The Respondent’s absence of a reply does not reverse the burden or confer a right to extension. The Court may dismiss an unopposed motion if the chronology and supporting proof do not justify discretionary relief.
7. The intended appeal’s jurisdiction is addressed under [Article 163 route and supporting decision]. An arguable grievance in a succession dispute is not itself proof of Supreme Court jurisdiction, and enlargement of time cannot supply missing certification.
8. The Applicants seek only the defined extension and appropriate costs directions. If the Court declines relief, the proposed appeal is not represented as admitted or pending. No constitutional time limit is sought to be enlarged.
DATED at [place] on [date]. [Signature of party or advocate]. DRAWN AND FILED BY [name and address for service]. TO BE SERVED UPON [each affected party and address].
Need a court document? Have an advocate prepare it.
Tell us about your dispute and the court involved. Request a document drafted for your facts, with your evidence and the relief you need.
An advocate confirms availability, scope and fees before accepting your matter.Educational reconstruction based on a reported decision. Newly drafted sample, not an original filing or a matter handled by our team. Identifying details are replaced with bracketed fields. Check your facts, current rules, court directions and jurisdiction before use.
Use and evidence notes
Do not turn submissions into a substitute affidavit or claim that counsel’s mistake is always excused. The source motion failed despite being unopposed. Check the current computation provisions, actual service dates and any case-specific directions before filing.
Source facts and limits of the decision
Two parties in a succession dispute sought more time to appeal a Kisumu Court of Appeal judgment of 6 November 2015. They blamed former counsel. A March 2016 proceedings-request letter showed knowledge of the judgment; the motion was not filed until January 2017.
The motion was dismissed without costs although unopposed. The receipt relied on concerned the earlier Court of Appeal case, and the later period of delay was not adequately explained. Alleging counsel’s mistake was insufficient without a supported chronology.
Current Supreme Court Rules 2020 rule 15(2) governs extension of rule-based time. The 2018 ruling applied the historical rule 53. Extension does not itself establish jurisdiction under Constitution Article 163(4) or extend a constitutional deadline.
Read the original reported decision: Supreme Court Civil Application 1 of 2017 — 8 November 2018
The original judgment may identify participants. These samples remove their names; allegations and unsuccessful arguments are identified as such. Relevant facts, reasons and disposition checked in the official Supreme Court judgment PDF through retrieved text. The specimen is a fresh educational reconstruction; it is not a reproduction of an actual pleading.
Related law and procedural rules
Constitution of Kenya · Supreme Court Act · Supreme Court Rules 2020 — official compilation
Need a court document? Have an advocate prepare it.
Tell us about your dispute and the court involved. Request a document drafted for your facts, with your evidence and the relief you need.
An advocate confirms availability, scope and fees before accepting your matter.