Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealStruck OutCivil Appeal (Application) No. 99 of 1988· [1996] KECA 128 (KLR)

John Kinuthia Githinji v Githua Kiarie Lucy Wamaitha Samuel Kiarie

Court of Appeal
14 October 1996
Philip Kiptoo TunoiP. K. TunoiGPG. S. PallSBS. E. O. Bosire
237 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed it cannot review its own completed judgments, striking out an application for lacking jurisdiction.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By Notice of Motion dated 19th August 1996, the applicant John Kinuthia Githinji asked the Court of Appeal at Nairobi to review its own judgment delivered on 12th April 1995 in Nairobi Civil Appeal No. 99 of 1988, an appeal arising from the judgment of Akiwumi J in Probate and Administration Cause No. 583 of 1981 dated 23rd August 1988. The application was expressed to be brought under rules 1(3), 31 and 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules and section 3(2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act. In a short ruling delivered on 14th October 1996 by Tunoi, Pall and Bosire JJ.A., the Court held that, being a creation of statute, it enjoys only such jurisdiction as is conferred on it by statute. The power to review its completed judgment had not been conferred on it, and it possessed no inherent jurisdiction to assume such a power. The application was therefore incompetent and was struck out for want of jurisdiction, with costs of the application awarded to the respondents. The ruling establishes the binding proposition that the Court of Appeal cannot review its own completed judgments in the absence of express statutory authority, and that no such power may be sourced in the Court's Rules or in section 3(2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Court of Appeal can review its own completed judgment

Holding

It cannot; the application for review was incompetent and was struck out for want of jurisdiction.

Reasoning

The Court reasoned that as a creature of statute it enjoys only such jurisdiction as is conferred on it by statute. The power to review a completed judgment was never conferred on it by the Appellate Jurisdiction Act or the Court's Rules, and the Court possesses no inherent jurisdiction to fill the gap. An application purportedly founded on rules 1(3), 31 and 5(2)(b) of the Rules and section 3(2) of the Act therefore disclosed no jurisdictional basis and had to be struck out, with costs to the respondents.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • The Court of Appeal, being a creation of statute, has only such jurisdiction as is conferred on it by statute, and has no power, statutory or inherent, to review its own completed judgment.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 19th August 1996 seeking review of the judgment delivered on 12th April 1995 was struck out for want of jurisdiction
  2. 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondents
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
P. & A. Cause No. 583 of 1981
Jurisdiction invoked
Rules of the Court of Appeal (rules 1(3), 31 and 5(2)(b)) and section 3(2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, as invoked by the applicant; the Court held it had no statutory power to review its own completed judgment

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "John Kinuthia Githinji v Githua Kiarie Lucy Wamaitha Samuel Kiarie", Case Analysis (1996). Civil Appeal (Application) No. 99 of 1988. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1996/128/eng@1996-10-14

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.