ALICEN J. R. CHELAITE vs DAVID MANYARA NJUKI & 2 OTHERS [1998] KECA 269 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that election petition rules remain fully valid even after Parliament amends the main election law.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether there is a conflict between section 20(1)(a) of the National Assembly and Presidential Election Act (Cap 7) and Rule 14(1) of the National Assembly Election (Election Petition) Rules
- 2.Whether the amendment of section 20(1)(a) of the Act by Act No. 10 of 1997 affected the efficacy of Rule 14(1) of the Election Petition Rules
Key legal issues
#Whether the 1997 amendment of section 20(1)(a) of the National Assembly and Presidential Election Act created a conflict with, or nullified, Rule 14(1) of the National Assembly Election (Election Petition) Rules
There is no conflict between the provision and the Rule, and the Rule retains full efficacy after the amendment.
Owuor JA records that during argument he was inclined to think a conflict existed between section 20(1)(a) of Cap 7 and Rule 14(1) of the Election Petition Rules, but on reading the lead judgments of Kwach and Pall JJ.A he was satisfied there was none. The court therefore upheld the High Court's treatment of the Rule as effective notwithstanding the 1997 amendment, and dismissed the appeal.
Legal principles established
#- Rule 14(1) of the National Assembly Election (Election Petition) Rules remains effective notwithstanding the amendment of section 20(1)(a) of the National Assembly and Presidential Election Act by Act No. 10 of 1997; there is no conflict between the two provisions.
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal dismissed
- 2.Costs of the appeal awarded (against the appellant)
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the judgment
Owuor JA wrote a short separate concurrence. He had initially inclined to the view that there was a conflict between section 20(1)(a) of the National Assembly and Presidential Election Act (Cap 7) and Rule 14(1) of the National Assembly Election (Election Petition) Rules, but on reading the draft judgments of Kwach and Pall JJ.A he was satisfied there was none, and agreed the appeal should be dismissed with costs.
I have had the advantage of reading in draft the Judgments of my brothers, Kwach and Pall JJ.A. I fully agree with them that for the reasons they have given, this appeal should be dismissed with costs.p. 2
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nakuru
- null
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over the High Court (ruling appealed from); specific enabling provision not stated in the judgment as reproduced.
Relief refused
#The appellant's appeal against the High Court ruling
The court found no conflict between the statutory provision and the Election Petition Rules such as would overturn the ruling below
Costs
Appeal dismissed with costs (to the respondents).
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.
I fully agree with them that for the reasons they have given, this appeal should be dismissed with costs.
The efficacy of Rule 14(1) has not been affected by the amendment of section 20(1) (a) of the Act, introduced by Act No. 10 of 1997.
Issues in the judgment
#The copy of the judgment reproduced contains only the concurring judgment of Owuor JA; the lead judgments of Kwach and Pall JJ.A, which contain the court's full reasoning, are not included, so the detailed holdings cannot be quoted.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (2)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Buyu v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 2 others (Civil Appeal 40 of 2013) [2014] KECA 809 (KLR)[2014] KECA 809 (KLR)21 Feb 2014
- Kibaki v Moi [1999] KECA 1 (KLR)[1999] KECA 1 (KLR)10 Dec 1999distinguished
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "ALICEN J. R. CHELAITE vs DAVID MANYARA NJUKI & 2 OTHERS [1998] KECA 269 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1998). Civil Appeal No. 150 of 1998. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1998/269/eng@1998-10-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.