Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealStruck OutMombasa Civil Appeal (arising from High Court appeal by Savings and Loan Kenya Limited)· [1987] KECA 86 (KLR)

Odongo & 6 others v Savings and Loan Kenya Ltd [1987] KECA 86 (KLR)

Court of Appeal
24 July 1987
1,255 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that when the law says a decision is final, you cannot use review to reopen it.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The respondent landlord had obtained possession orders against the appellants before the Rent Restriction Tribunal, which dismissed the suits; the High Court on appeal reversed the Tribunal. Section 8(4) of the Rent Restriction Act makes the High Court's appellate decision final, so no appeal lies to the Court of Appeal. The appellants instead applied to the High Court for review of its appellate judgment under section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 44 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, contending the High Court lacked jurisdiction over the earlier appeal, an error apparent on the face of the record. The High Court dismissed the review, and the tenants appealed. At the hearing the respondent raised a preliminary objection to the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction. The court, in a unanimous three-judge bench, held that the appeal was properly before it as a first appeal against the High Court's review ruling, but that the High Court itself had had no jurisdiction to entertain the review: section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act applies only to orders appealable under that Act, and section 8(4) of the Rent Restriction Act forbids any further challenge to the High Court's appellate decision. Review could not be used to do indirectly what the statute bars directly, in the public interest that litigation end. The preliminary objection was upheld and the appeal struck out with costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether review under section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act is available against a High Court appellate decision under the Rent Restriction Act

Holding

It is not; section 8(4) makes the High Court's appellate decision final and section 80 does not apply to the Rent Restriction Act.

Reasoning

Section 8(4) of the Rent Restriction Act forbids further appeals from the High Court's appellate decision. Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act provides for review only of orders from which an appeal is allowed by that Act, and the Rent Restriction Act is outside it. Allowing review would permit a litigant indirectly to do what the legislature has directly forbidden, subverting its expressed intention that there be an end to litigation after one appeal.

p. 2
02

Consequence for the appeal to the Court of Appeal

Holding

Since the High Court had no jurisdiction over the review application, no appeal lay to the Court of Appeal and the appeal was struck out.

Reasoning

The court accepted the respondent's preliminary objection that the High Court lacked jurisdiction over the review. A decision rendered without jurisdiction cannot ground an appeal. The matter the appellants sought to revisit on review had already been considered and determined on the earlier appeal, and resurrecting it would circumvent section 8(4).

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Section 8(4) of the Rent Restriction Act renders the High Court's appellate decision final; no further appeal or review lies, and review cannot be used to circumvent that finality.
  • A right of appeal must be expressly conferred and cannot arise by implication.
  • A litigant may not achieve indirectly, by review, what he is barred from doing directly by statute.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Preliminary objection on jurisdiction upheld
  2. 2.Appeal struck out with costs
On appeal from
High Court
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 8(4) of the Rent Restriction Act, Cap 296; appeal to Court of Appeal treated as a first appeal under section 66 of the Civil Procedure Act (Hamzaali Alibhai)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Odongo & 6 others v Savings and Loan Kenya Ltd [1987] KECA 86 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1987). Mombasa Civil Appeal (arising from High Court appeal by Savings and Loan Kenya Limited). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1987/86/eng@1987-07-24

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.