Kenya National Highway Authority v Cycad Properties Limited & 33 others
The bottom line
#Supreme Court cannot review its own rulings unless there is fraud, nullity, or similar exceptional grounds.
What this practically means
#The Supreme Court of Kenya dismissed two applications in this case. First, it refused to review its own earlier ruling because the applicant did not prove fraud, deceit, or any other exceptional circumstance required by law. Second, it allowed late-filed court documents to remain on record because the delay was explained and no one was prejudiced. The Court emphasized that summarized rulings are valid under the Practice Directions.
Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether an order to expunge the respondents’ pleadings should issue
- 2.Whether the application meets the threshold for grant of review orders
- 3.If the answer to (ii) above is in the affirmative, what remedies are available
Key legal issues
#Whether the application for review met the threshold for review of a Supreme Court decision
The applicant failed to establish any of the exceptional circumstances required for review under section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act and the Fredrick Outa case.
The applicant argued that the court failed to give reasons for its ruling, violating rights to fair hearing and fair administrative action. However, the court found that the impugned ruling was a summarized ruling permitted by the Practice Directions, 2020, and that the court had in fact given its reasoning at paragraph 13 of the ruling. The applicant's grounds did not fall within the limited exceptional circumstances for review: fraud, nullity, mistaken consent, or reliance on repealed law. Therefore, the application was dismissed.
Whether the respondents' pleadings filed out of time should be expunged
The court declined to expunge the pleadings, exercising its inherent jurisdiction to retain them in the interests of justice.
The applicant sought expungement because the respondents filed their responses one to two days late without leave. The court acknowledged that compliance with directions is important, but found that the delay was satisfactorily explained (technical issues with e-filing and obtaining instructions), no prejudice was suffered by the applicant, and expungement would shut out the respondents from justice. The court therefore retained the pleadings.
Legal principles established
#- The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to sit on appeal over its own decisions or to review them except under section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act.
- Review of a Supreme Court decision is only available in exceptional circumstances: fraud, deceit, nullity, mistaken belief of consent, or reliance on a repealed law.
- A summarized ruling issued under the Supreme Court Practice Directions, 2020 is valid and does not require detailed reasons to avoid review.
- Late-filed pleadings may be retained by the court if the delay is explained, no prejudice is caused, and expungement would shut out a party from justice.
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion dated 29th March 2021 and filed on 31st March 2021 is hereby dismissed
- 2.The notice of motion dated 10th April 2021 and filed on 12th April 2021 is hereby dismissed
- 3.The applicant shall bear the 1st, 2nd to 30th respondent’s costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- Supreme Court of Kenya
- Application No 26 of 2020
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act, 2011; rule 28(5) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2020
Relief refused
#Review of the Supreme Court ruling of 17th March 2021
The applicant failed to meet the conditions for review set out in the Fredrick Outa case
Expungement of the respondents' replies and submissions
The delay was satisfactorily explained and no prejudice was suffered; interests of justice favoured retaining the pleadings
Costs
The applicant shall bear the 1st, 2nd to 30th respondent’s costs
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.
as a general rule, the Supreme Court has neither jurisdiction to sit on appeal over its own decisions, nor to review its decisions, other than in the manner contemplated by section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act
We find that this assertion is misplaced and made in disregard of the provisions of Paragraph 30 of this court’s Practice Directions, 2020 which allows the adoption of summarized rulings by the court
in the interests of justice to all parties, we are inclined to invoke our inherent jurisdiction in favour of retaining the pleadings in question on the court record
The notice of motion dated 29th March 2021 and filed on 31st March 2021 is hereby dismissed
The notice of motion dated 10th April 2021 and filed on 12th April 2021 is hereby dismissed
The applicant shall bear the 1st, 2nd to 30th respondent’s costs
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Review threshold is extremely narrow
When advising clients on challenging a Supreme Court decision, emphasize that review is not an appeal. Only grounds like fraud, nullity, or reliance on a repealed law will succeed. Ensure any application clearly pleads one of these exceptional circumstances, as general complaints about lack of reasons will not suffice.
Finality of Supreme Court decisions
Businesses should treat a Supreme Court ruling as final. The court will not reopen a case simply because you disagree with the reasoning or think it was unfair. Plan your litigation strategy accordingly, and invest in getting it right at the Supreme Court stage because the door for review is nearly closed.
Late filings may be excused
If you miss a court deadline by a day or two due to technical issues or difficulty getting instructions, the court may still accept your documents. But you must provide a clear explanation and show that the other side was not prejudiced. Do not assume lateness will be forgiven without a good reason.
Frequently asked questions
#Can the Supreme Court of Kenya review its own decisions?+
Only in very limited circumstances: if the judgment was obtained by fraud or deceit, is a nullity, was given under a mistaken belief of consent, or relied on a repealed law. Otherwise, the Supreme Court cannot sit on appeal over its own rulings.
What are the grounds for review of a Supreme Court ruling in Kenya?+
The grounds are set out in section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act and the Fredrick Outa case. They include fraud, deceit, nullity, mistaken belief of consent, or reliance on a repealed or deliberately concealed statutory provision. No other grounds are accepted.
Can late court filings be accepted in Kenya?+
Yes, a court may accept late-filed documents if the delay is satisfactorily explained, no prejudice is caused to the other side, and it is in the interests of justice. In this case, the Supreme Court retained pleadings filed one to two days late due to e-filing issues.
What is a summarized ruling in the Supreme Court of Kenya?+
A summarized ruling is a short decision that gives the outcome and key reasoning without a full detailed judgment. It is allowed under the Supreme Court Practice Directions, 2020. The court does not have to provide extensive reasons, and a summarized ruling cannot be reviewed just because it is brief.
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya National Highway Authority v Cycad Properties Limited & 33 others", Case Analysis (2021). Application 6 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.orghttps://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kesc/2021/8/eng@2021-10-08
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.