Senate of Kenya & 3 others v Speaker of the National Assembly & 10 others
The bottom line
#Supreme Court cannot review its own decision after a previous review, as it lacks jurisdiction.
What this practically means
#A group of politicians asked the Supreme Court to change a ruling that had already been reviewed. The Court said no, because it cannot reconsider a decision it has already settled. The only exceptions are cases of fraud, deceit, or if the Court was tricked. None of those applied here, so the application was dismissed and each side paid its own costs.
Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the application meets the grounds for review of the Supreme Court's own decision as set out in the Outa case
- 2.Whether the court has jurisdiction to review a decision that has already been reviewed
Key legal issues
#Whether the Supreme Court can review its own decision after a previous review application has been determined.
The court cannot review a decision that has already been reviewed, as it is functus officio and lacks jurisdiction to do so.
The court noted that the applicants were seeking to review the ruling of June 3, 2022, which itself was a decision on a review application. The Supreme Court Act and Rules provide that any review by the court is final and not subject to further review. The court found that the applicants had not demonstrated any of the limited grounds for review set out in the Outa case, and that granting the application would amount to the court sitting on appeal of its own decision, which it lacks jurisdiction to do.
Whether the applicants met the grounds for review of the Supreme Court's own decision as set out in the Outa case.
The applicants did not meet any of the grounds for review.
The court applied the three grounds from the Outa case: fraud or deceit, nullity, or the court being misled under a mistaken belief of consent. The court found that none of these grounds were demonstrated by the applicants. The applicants' arguments about the effect of the ruling on pending Bills and the main petition did not fall within these limited grounds.
Legal principles established
#- The Supreme Court has no power to review its own decision except in cases of fraud, deceit, nullity, or being misled about consent.
- A party cannot ask the Court to review a decision that has already been reviewed – the Court is functus officio (its job is done).
- The Supreme Court cannot sit on appeal of its own decisions.
- The limited grounds for review from the Outa case are the only ones allowed.
- An applicant must show one of the specific grounds for review; otherwise the application fails.
- In public interest cases, each party may bear its own costs even if the application is dismissed.
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion application dated July 1, 2022 is hereby dismissed
- 2.Each party shall bear its costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- Supreme Court of Kenya
- Application No 4 (E010) of 2022
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Supreme Court Act, section 21(A) and inherent powers as enunciated in Fredrick Otieno Outa v Jared Odoyo Okello & 3 others
Relief refused
#Review, vary and/or set aside the ruling and order of this Court delivered on June 3, 2022
The application did not meet the grounds for review as set out in the Outa case; the court lacks jurisdiction to review a decision already reviewed
Costs
Each party shall bear its 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(A) of the Supreme Court Act and as enunciated in the Outa case
it has not been demonstrated by the applicants that the impugned ruling was obtained by fraud or deceit, is a nullity, or that the court was misled into giving its ruling on review under a mistaken belief that the parties had consented as per the guidelines set in the Outa case
learned counsel for the applicants seek this court to exercise a jurisdiction it lacks, namely, to review or re-litigate the question of stay, which has been settled by this court with finality
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Strict limits on Supreme Court review
This ruling confirms that once the Supreme Court decides a review application, it is final. Lawyers must ensure any review application is based squarely on the Outa grounds (fraud, deceit, nullity, or mistaken consent). A second review attempting to reargue the same issues will be struck out for lack of jurisdiction, wasting time and costs.
Finality of court decisions is key
Businesses relying on Supreme Court rulings on review applications can take comfort that those decisions are final. Opponents cannot keep reopening the same issue. This reduces uncertainty and litigation costs. However, if a business believes a ruling was obtained through fraud, it must act quickly and prove it clearly.
Limited chances to challenge rulings
If you are involved in a case that reaches the Supreme Court, understand that after a review, you cannot ask for another review. The only way to challenge is if the decision was obtained by fraud or the court was misled. This means you must present your strongest arguments upfront, as there is very little room for second chances.
Frequently asked questions
#Can the Supreme Court of Kenya review its own decision?+
Only in very limited cases: if the judgment was obtained by fraud or deceit, is a nullity, or the court was misled into giving it under a mistaken belief of consent. Otherwise, the court cannot review its own decisions.
What is functus officio in Kenya?+
Functus officio means a court has completed its job on a matter and cannot reconsider it. Once the Supreme Court has ruled on a review application, it is functus officio and cannot hear a second review of the same issue.
What are the grounds for review of a Supreme Court decision in Kenya?+
The grounds are from the Outa case: (1) the judgment was obtained by fraud or deceit, (2) the judgment is a nullity, or (3) the court was misled into giving it under a mistaken belief that the parties consented.
Can I appeal a Supreme Court review decision in Kenya?+
No. The Supreme Court is the highest court, and its decisions are final. There is no appeal from a Supreme Court ruling, including a review decision. The only option is to apply for a review on the limited grounds mentioned above.
Later judgments citing this (4)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- BKR (Suing as Father and Next Friend to the Minors DCR & LKR) v FNM (Children's Case E119 of 2023) [2026] KEMC 255 (KLR)[2026] KEMC 255 (KLR)30 Jun 2026
- Mwambeja Ranching Company Limited & another v Kenya National Capital Corporation[2024] KESC 28 (KLR)28 Jun 2024
- Kaluma v NGO Co-ordination Board & 5 others[2023] KESC 72 (KLR)12 Sept 2023
- Cogno Ventures Limited & 4 others v Bia Tosha Distributors Limited & 15 others; Kenya Breweries Limited & 6 others (Interested Parties); Ferran & 24 others (Contemnor)[2023] KESC 33 (KLR)26 May 2023followed
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Senate of Kenya & 3 others v Speaker of the National Assembly & 10 others", Case Analysis (2023). Application 7 (E013) of 2022. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.orghttps://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kesc/2023/1/eng@2023-01-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.