The County Government of Kisumu & 1 other v Meptax Consultum Limited
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal ruled that only a full bench of judges can review its own decisions, so the application was sent to a full bench.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Characterisation of the application - out-of-time leave or review of a full-bench decision
Whichever characterisation is adopted, the thrust of the application is for review of the full bench's decision, which the single Judge cannot entertain.
The Court observed that the application was unclear as to whether it sought leave to file an appeal out of time or review of the decision of 28th November, 2025 striking out the appeal for want of leave under Rule 84(1). Reading the substance of the application, the Court held that in either view it amounted to a quest for review of a full-bench decision, a matter outside the jurisdiction of the Judge seised, requiring referral to a full Bench.
Legal principles established
#- A single Judge of the Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to review a decision of the full bench of the Court; such an application must be placed before a full Bench.
Court orders
#- 1.That the application be listed for hearing before a full Bench of the Court
- 2.That there be no orders as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal under the Court of Appeal Rules (Rule 84(1) invoked on the facts); the Court found it lacked jurisdiction to review its own decision
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "The County Government of Kisumu & 1 other v Meptax Consultum Limited", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/488/eng@2026-03-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.