Time management is an issue that precedes the legal system and the human race has found expressions and phrases to deter one from wasting the same. Such expressions include time waits for no man, a stitch in time saves nine, you may delay but time will not, the only thing you cannot recycle is wasted time, etc.
Well, the legal system in Kenya, like in many other jurisdictions takes time wastage very seriously. So serious that there is a limitation of actions Act to govern timelines for bringing actions in court. So grave, that the courts themselves have set timelines within which to adjudicate on a matter. So crucial are these timelines that a court operating beyond this timeline is deprived of its jurisdiction and any judgment delivered outside and beyond the set timelines is null and void. The significance of this is that a party bringing the action is locked out of the seat of justice to what is referred to as an effluxion of time or lapse of time.
The Small Claims Act reads that all proceedings before the Court on any particular day so far as is practicable shall be heard and determined on the same day or on a day-to-day basis until final determination of the matter which shall be within sixty (60) days from the date of filing of the claim.
The importance of the above timeline was emphasized in the recent appeal decision of Kartar Singh Dhupar & Company Limited v ARM Cement PLC (In Liquidation) (Civil Appeal 129 of 2022) [2023] KEHC 2417 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (23 March 2023) (Judgment) where the High Court judge annulled the Small Claims Court judgment delivered by the Honourable Adjudicator on 23rd August, 2022 (17 days after lapse). The court held that having been delivered outside the statutory timelines set under Section 34 of the Small Claims Court Act the judgement was made without jurisdiction and therefore a nullity, bereft of any force or effect in law. This was held despite finding that the Appellant had played a major role in wastage of the set timeline.
The import of the decision in this case vis-à-vis the overriding objectives is debatable and a topic for discussion but the takeaway is that keenness and adherence to set timelines by yourself or your advocate is key in accessing justice in our legal system.
Authors;
Zahra Nechesa – Partner
Nderitu Wang’ombe – Lawye
