LSK Oversight Under Scrutiny as JILK Lawyer Found Practicing Without Certificate

The ongoing, high-profile case in which JILK Construction Company Limited seeks to block the sale of EABL shares by Diageo to Asahi took a dramatic and unexpected turn in the High Court yesterday. What began as a routine hearing to highlight submissions on JILK’s application quickly spiraled into a legal quagmire for the company. At the start of the hearing, a bombshell revealed that JILK’s advocate on record, Christopher Kibe Mungai, did not hold a valid practicing certificate until 11 March 2026. This discovery, supported by official receipts, immediately raised questions about the legality of all filings submitted by JILK. A review of the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) online portal on 10 March 2026 showed that Kibe was listed as “Inactive” and therefore not entitled to practice. The reason cited was glaring: he had accumulated zero (0) Continuing Professional Development (CPD) points for 2025. Following this, an official letter was sent to the LSK on 11 March 2026 seeking confirmation of Kibe’s practicing status. In a twist that has raised eyebrows, on that very same day—11 March 2026—Kibe applied and paid for his 2026 practicing certificate. The timing has prompted questions about procedural gaps and administrative oversight at the LSK. How was a certificate issued to someone who had clearly failed to meet CPD requirements? Was proper due diligence followed? The LSK responded with a letter dated 12 March 2026, confirming that Kibe had paid his fees on 11 March and was legally eligible to practice from that date. Cornered in court, counsel for JILK had no choice but to admit that Kibe only obtained a valid certificate on 11 March 2026, promising to respond fully once a formal application was filed. Senior Counsel Nelson Havi did not comment on the allegations, leaving the courtroom unusually silent. The Court has directed that any application challenging the competence of JILK’s advocate be filed and served within two days. Meanwhile, the ruling on JILK’s earlier application dated 17 February 2026 has been suspended pending resolution of this new legal crisis. Submissions from both parties continued, and the matter is set for mention on 16 April 2026. Legal experts warn that the consequences for JILK could be severe. In Kenya, advocates practicing without a valid certificate expose all pleadings and court appearances made while unqualified to being voidable and potentially struck out. Kenyan courts have consistently ruled that filings by an unqualified advocate are fundamentally defective under the Advocates Act. Similar rules exist in other Commonwealth countries, including the UK and Australia, where strict certification compliance is enforced to protect the public and maintain judicial integrity. The unfolding case not only highlights the high stakes for JILK but also exposes gaps in oversight and administrative controls within the legal profession. With questions now being asked about how the LSK monitors compliance, this case could set an important precedent for accountability in Kenya’s legal system. One thing is certain: the courtroom twists and turns in this case are astonishing, and you really cannot make this stuff up.