Geonet Communications Limited v Safaricom Plc & 2 others
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that telecom disputes resolved through CAMAT and the High Court end there — no further appeal lies to the Court of Appeal.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether Geonet has a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal against the High Court ruling of 15th September 2023 dismissing its review application, given Section 102G(3) of the KICA
- 2.Whether the Notice of Appeal dated 20th September 2023 and Record of Appeal dated 5th October 2023 should be struck out
Key legal issues
#Whether Section 102G(3) of the KICA ousts the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction over appeals from High Court decisions on CAMAT appeals
Yes - the section is a finality clause creating an absolute statutory bar to third-tier appeals to the Court of Appeal
The Court relied on its prior decision in Communications Authority of Kenya v Okiya Omtata Okoiti, holding that Section 102G(3) creates an absolute statutory bar to third-tier appeals, ousting the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction. The truncated statutory dispute-resolution mechanism for telecommunications matters ends at the High Court. Geonet had already exercised the available review mechanism, and should have sought leave if it wished to test the right of appeal.
Whether Article 164(3) of the Constitution confers a universal right of appeal to the Court of Appeal
No - Article 164(3) only delimits the Court of Appeal's powers; a right of appeal must be expressly conferred by statute
Following the Supreme Court in Nyutu Agrovet, the Court held that Article 164(3) particularises the confines of the Court of Appeal's powers but does not grant litigants unfettered access. Section 3(1) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act delineates jurisdiction and states when an appeal lies. Although Section 75(1)(h) of the Civil Procedure Act allows appeals from review orders, statutes such as the KICA may limit the right of appeal.
Whether the jurisdictional objection is a mere procedural technicality
No - jurisdiction goes to the heart of the matter and must be addressed substantively
Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Samuel Macharia v Kenya Commercial Bank, the Court held that the question of a court's jurisdiction is not a mere procedural technicality; without jurisdiction a court cannot entertain proceedings, and a court cannot arrogate to itself jurisdiction exceeding that conferred by law or expand it through judicial craft or innovation.
Legal principles established
#- Section 102G(3) of the KICA is a finality clause that statutorily bars appeals to the Court of Appeal from High Court decisions on appeals from CAMAT
- Article 164(3) of the Constitution does not confer an unfettered right of appeal on litigants; a right of appeal must be expressly conferred by statute
- A court cannot assume or expand jurisdiction not conferred by the Constitution or written law
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion application dated 17th October 2023 is allowed
- 2.Geonet's Notice of Appeal dated 20th September 2023 and the Record of Appeal dated 5th October 2023 are struck out
- 3.Costs of the application to Safaricom/applicant
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- High Court at Nairobi (Commercial and Tax Division)
- HCCC No. E023 of 2022
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 164(3) of the Constitution as delimited by Section 102G(3) of the Kenya Information and Communications Act
Relief refused
#Geonet's implied request to sustain its appeal against the High Court review ruling
No right of appeal exists under Section 102G(3) KICA; the High Court decision on a CAMAT appeal is final
Costs
Costs of the application awarded to Safaricom/applicant
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 102G (3) of the KICA is in the class of what are commonly referred to as finality clauses, and in our context, restricts second appeals from decisions of some tribunals and administrative bodies in the interests of finality of disputes
article 164(3) defines the extent of the powers of the Court of Appeal but does not grant a litigant an unfettered access to the Court of Appeal
The said application is hereby allowed and Geonet's Notice of Appeal dated 20th September, 2023 and the Record of Appeal dated 5th October, 2023 are hereby struck out with costs to Safaricom/applicant
if the appellant wanted to test the waters as far as the right of appeal is concerned, in view of Section 102G (3) it should have filed an application for leave to appeal first and not plunge into the deep end in the first instance
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Geonet Communications Limited v Safaricom Plc & 2 others", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Appeal (Application) E796 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1913/eng@2026-09-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.