[2012] KESC 3 (KLR)

[2012] KESC 3 (KLR)

The Supreme Court held that while the conduct of the applicant's counsel in seeking adjournment without adequate briefing of another counsel was disrespectful and negligent, the interests of justice required that the appellant not be prejudiced by her counsel's actions. The court emphasized its role as the apex...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] KESC 3 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Nancy Makokha Baraza; Respondent: Tribunal Investigating the Conduct of Hon. Deputy Chief Justice & Vice-President of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kenya
Court
Supreme Court
Court Station
Supreme Court of Kenya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 7 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Petition / Ruling on Application for Adjournment
Outcome
Application for adjournment allowed with conditions.
Judges
WM Mutunga, PK Tunoi, JB Ojwang, SC Wanjala, NS Ndungu
Legal Topics
Adjournment of Hearing, Judicial Discretion, Counsel Conduct
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Adjournment of Hearing Judicial Discretion Counsel Conduct

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nancy Makokha Baraza

Applicant

Tribunal Investigating the Conduct of Hon. Deputy Chief Justice & Vice-President of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kenya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition / Ruling on Application for Adjournment

  1. 1 Whether the application for adjournment by the applicant's counsel should be granted in the circumstances presented.
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the applicant's counsel in seeking adjournment constituted disrespect or negligence towards the court.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that while the conduct of the applicant's counsel in seeking adjournment without adequate briefing of another counsel was disrespectful and negligent, the interests of justice required that the appellant not be prejudiced by her counsel's actions. The court emphasized its role as the apex court and the importance of maintaining respect for its schedule and authority. However, in balancing the need for expeditious disposal and fairness to the appellant, the court allowed the adjournment but imposed strict conditions, including a firm hearing date, a bar on further adjournment applications, and a personal costs order against Mrs. Guserwa for the adjournment.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment allowed with conditions.

Orders

  • The application for adjournment is hereby allowed.
  • The appeal shall be heard at 10:00 a.m. on October 23, 2012.