JILK Case Takes Twist After Advocate’s Practising Certificate Query

A high-stakes legal battle involving JILK Construction Company Limited and the proposed sale of East African Breweries Limited (EABL) shares has taken an unexpected turn at the High Court, introducing fresh uncertainty into an already closely watched case.

JILK is seeking to block the sale of shares by Diageo to Asahi Group Holdings. However, what was expected to be a routine court session for highlighting submissions quickly shifted focus after a procedural issue emerged concerning the company’s legal representation.

At the centre of the developments is JILK’s advocate on record, Christopher Kibe Mungai. Questions were raised in court about whether he held a valid practising certificate at the time he filed documents and appeared in the matter. It emerged that the advocate only obtained his 2026 practising certificate on March 11.

A check on the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) online portal a day earlier, on March 10, had listed him as “inactive” and not authorised to practise. The status was reportedly linked to failure to meet the required Continuing Professional Development (CPD) points for the year 2025.

Following this, a formal inquiry was made to the LSK seeking clarification on his status. In its response dated March 12, the Society confirmed that the advocate had applied and paid for his practising certificate on March 11, effectively clearing him to practise from that date.

The timing of these events has now become a key issue in the case, raising questions about the validity of documents filed before the certificate was obtained. Under Kenyan law, an advocate is required to hold a valid practising certificate to legally represent clients in court.

During the proceedings, JILK’s legal team acknowledged that the practising certificate was obtained on March 11, indicating that they would respond to the concerns once a formal application is filed. Senior Counsel Nelson Havi, who is part of the legal team, did not address the matter during the session.

The court has since directed that any application challenging the advocate’s competence be filed and served within two days. As a result, a ruling on JILK’s earlier application dated February 17, 2026 has been put on hold pending determination of the new issue.

Despite the procedural concerns, parties proceeded to highlight their submissions, and the matter is now scheduled for mention on April 16, 2026.

Legal experts say the implications of the issue could be significant. In Kenya, pleadings filed by an advocate without a valid practising certificate are considered defective and may be struck out, depending on the court’s determination. Similar standards are applied in other jurisdictions to safeguard the integrity of legal proceedings.

With the case now taking this new direction, attention will be on how the court resolves the question of representation — and what it means for JILK’s attempt to halt the share sale.