Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealDismissedCriminal Appeal No. 5 of 1997· [1998] KECA 205 (KLR)

MERCY NDUTA KARIUKI vs REPUBLIC [1998] KECA 205 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
24 February 1998
ROR. S. C. OmoloPhilip Kiptoo TunoiP. K. TunoiASA. B. Shah
177 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed it will not revisit facts in a second criminal appeal unless a point of law is raised.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a second appeal to the Court of Appeal at Nairobi by Mercy Nduta Kariuki against criminal convictions, brought from a judgment of the High Court (V. V. Patel, J) dated 27 July 1995 in H.C.CR.A. No. 297, 298 of 1995. The memorandum of appeal challenged the convictions purely on facts as found by the trial magistrate and the first appellate court. The Court of Appeal, in a short judgment delivered by the court as a whole (Omolo, Tunoi and Shah, JJ.A), held that where two lower courts have made concurrent findings of fact that are supported by the evidence on record, a second appeal raising no points of law must fail. The Court expressed itself satisfied that the concurrent findings were borne out by the evidence and dismissed the appeal, affirming the decision below. The judgment is a concise restatement of the settled principle that a second appellate court does not re-evaluate facts and confines itself to questions of law. No authorities were cited, no separate opinions were written, and no costs order was made. The judgment as reproduced contains minor typographical errors ('wed' for 'we' and 'Naioribi' for 'Nairobi') which do not affect its substance.

Key legal issues

#
01

Scope of a second criminal appeal confined to points of law

Holding

The second appellate court will not entertain a challenge to concurrent findings of fact; the appeal fails where it raises no point of law.

Reasoning

The appellants challenged their convictions purely on facts as found by the trial magistrate and the first appellate court. Because both lower courts made concurrent findings of fact that the Court of Appeal was satisfied were borne out by the evidence on record, the appeal raised no points of law and had to fail. The Court accordingly affirmed the convictions without re-evaluating the evidence.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A second appellate court will not disturb concurrent findings of fact by the trial court and the first appellate court where those findings are supported by the evidence on record; a second appeal is confined to points of law.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal is dismissed
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
H.C.CR.A. No. 297, 298 of 1995
Jurisdiction invoked
Second appellate jurisdiction over criminal appeals under the Court's statutory framework (provision not stated in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "MERCY NDUTA KARIUKI vs REPUBLIC [1998] KECA 205 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1998). Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 1997. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1998/205/eng@1998-02-24

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