Wahiu & 7 others v Magereza Savings and Credit Cooperative Society Limited (Civil Appeal 98 of 2019) [2025] KECA 621 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed it cannot hear appeals from High Court decisions on Co-operatives Tribunal matters, striking out members' property dispute.
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 Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from a decision of the High Court on appeal from the Co-operatives Tribunal, given Section 81(3) of the Co-operative Societies Act
- 2.Whether the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by re-appraising evidence rather than confining itself to matters of law
Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over High Court decisions on appeal from the Co-operatives Tribunal
The Court has no jurisdiction; Section 81(3) of the Co-operative Societies Act makes the High Court's decision on such an appeal final, and jurisdiction cannot be assumed by judicial innovation
The respondent's appeal from the Tribunal's award went to the High Court under Section 81 of the Act. Section 81(3) declares the High Court's decision final. Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Samuel Kamau Macharia and its own decision in Godfrey Kinuu Maingi, the Court held that a court cannot exercise jurisdiction not conferred by the Constitution or written law. The appellants' argument that an alleged excess of jurisdiction by the High Court conferred jurisdiction on the Court of Appeal was rejected as innovative.
Whether the appellants' contention that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction opens a path to the Court of Appeal
No - even where the High Court allegedly re-appraised evidence contrary to Section 74(2), that does not clothe the Court of Appeal with jurisdiction
Mr. Gitonga argued that because the appeal challenged the High Court exceeding its mandate by re-appraising evidence instead of confining itself to matters of law, the Court of Appeal was clothed with jurisdiction. The Court dismissed this as 'innovative', holding that jurisdiction flows only from the Constitution or legislation and cannot be expanded through judicial craft or innovation, following the Supreme Court in Samuel Kamau Macharia.
Legal principles established
#- No appeal lies to the Court of Appeal from the High Court's decision on an appeal from the Co-operatives Tribunal, as Section 81(3) of the Co-operative Societies Act makes that decision final
- A court cannot assume or expand appellate jurisdiction beyond that conferred by the Constitution or statute, even through judicial craft or innovation
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is struck out
- 2.Each party will bear its own costs of the appeal
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- High Court at Nairobi
- Nairobi Co-operative Tribunal Case No. 525 of 2011 (appeal therefrom)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- None - Section 81(3) of the Co-operative Societies Act provides the decision of the High Court on appeal shall be final, so no appeal lies to the Court of Appeal
Relief refused
#The appellants' appeal against the High Court judgment setting aside the Tribunal award
The Court lacks jurisdiction because Section 81(3) of the Co-operative Societies Act makes the High Court's decision final; jurisdiction cannot be created through judicial innovation
Costs
Each party will bear its own costs of the appeal
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.
Section 81(3) of the Co-operative Societies Act is explicit that “the decision of the High Court on any appeal shall be final.”
That is innovative. But as the Supreme Court cautioned a court “cannot expand its jurisdiction through judicial craft or innovation”.
The result is that there is no competent appeal before us. It is accordingly struck out. Given that the dispute involved the appellants in their capacity as former members of the respondent, we order that each party will bear its own costs of the appeal.
Issues in the judgment
#The case title is not expressly stated; it has been inferred from the description of the parties. Also, a case number for this appeal is not given in the judgment.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wahiu & 7 others v Magereza Savings and Credit Cooperative Society Limited (Civil Appeal 98 of 2019) [2025] KECA 621 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Civil Appeal (Nairobi). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/621/eng@2025-04-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.