Florence Nyaboke Machani v Mogere Amosiombui & 2 Others [2015] KECA 12 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal refused to let a land dispute reach the Supreme Court, ruling that settled questions about Land Disputes Tribunals' powers are not matters of general public importance.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the intended appeal involves a matter of general public importance warranting certification under Article 163(4)(b)
- 2.Whether the Land Disputes Tribunals established under the repealed Land Disputes Tribunal Act had jurisdiction to determine claims of title to land
- 3.Whether a decision of such a Tribunal on a claim of title can be nullified by a declaration
Key legal issues
#Whether the intended appeal raised a matter of general public importance under Article 163(4)(b)
The application was dismissed; the question whether Land Disputes Tribunals had jurisdiction over title claims is settled by Section 3 of the Act and numerous decisions, so it is not a matter of general public importance deserving the Supreme Court's input.
The Court held that the criterion for certification is whether the appeal concerns a matter of general public importance. Here the jurisdictional question was clear from Section 3 of the repealed Land Disputes Tribunal Act and had been conclusively resolved in numerous decisions of the High Court and the Court of Appeal, some of which the applicant's own counsel had cited. Citing the Supreme Court in Peter Oduor Ngoge, the Court held that only cardinal issues of law or jurisprudential moment deserve the Supreme Court's further input, and this was not such an issue.
Legal principles established
#- Under Article 163(4)(b), certification to appeal to the Supreme Court requires that the subject matter be a matter of general public importance; issues that are settled through numerous decisions of the High Court and Court of Appeal do not qualify, as only cardinal issues of law or jurisprudential moment merit the Supreme Court's input.
Court orders
#- 1.The application for certification to appeal to the Supreme Court is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application to the respondents
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- Court of Appeal of Kenya
- Civil Appeal No. 184 of 2011
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 163(4)(b) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010
Relief refused
#Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court (certification)
The issue raised is settled law, decided by numerous High Court and Court of Appeal decisions, and is not a matter of general public importance
Costs
The application is dismissed with costs to the respondents
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Under Article 163(4)(b) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, the criterion for certification to appeal to the Supreme Court is if the subject matter of the appeal is a matter of general public importance.
the chain of courts in the constitutional set-up, running up to the Court of Appeal have the professional competence and proper safety designs, to resolve all matters turning on the technical complexity of the law; and only cardinal issues of law or of jurisprudential moment, will deserve the further input of the Supreme Court.
In the circumstances, we agree with counsel for the respondents that this application has no merit and we accordingly dismiss it with costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The coram lists 'KANTAI, JJA' while the description of the decision below and the signature block render the judge's name as 'ole Kantai', a minor inconsistency in the spelling of the same judge's name.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Florence Nyaboke Machani v Mogere Amosiombui & 2 Others [2015] KECA 12 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Civil Application No. 65 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2015/12/eng@2015-02-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.