RAMJI RATNA & COMPANY LIMITED v WOOD PRODUCTS (KENYA) LIMITED [2007] KECA 233 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that it rarely overturns a trial court's findings of fact unless they lack evidence, misread the record, or rest on a wrong principle.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the learned Commissioner of Assize erred in finding that the works were completed satisfactorily without evidence to warrant such a finding
- 2.Whether the superior court relied on hearsay evidence to determine the terms of the oral contract
- 3.Whether the trial court disregarded or failed to give proper regard to the evidence of the defendant's witness
- 4.Whether the Commissioner erred in finding that the rate for the apartment works was Kshs. 225 per square foot exclusive of Value Added Tax
Key legal issues
#The duties of a first appellate court towards findings of fact
The Court restated the classic rule that on a first appeal it must reconsider the evidence and reach its own conclusions, but will not interfere with a trial court's findings of fact unless they are based on no evidence, a misapprehension of evidence, or a wrong principle.
Relying on Peters v Sunday Post, Selle v Associated Motor Boat Co and Ephantus Mwangi, the Court set out its obligation to re-assess the evidence while making due allowance for the trial judge's advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses. It then re-read the evidence of the two witnesses and independently agreed that the respondent proved its case on a balance of probabilities. Having applied that standard, the Court found all four grounds of appeal, which were purely attacks on findings of fact, to be without merit.
Whether the trial court's findings on completion of works and the contract rate were supported by evidence
The Court affirmed the trial court's findings that the works were completed within the agreed time and that the applicable rate was Kshs. 225 per square foot, holding that the defendant's complaints were an afterthought unsupported by proof.
The trial court had reasoned that the defendant's complaint came only in December, over two months after the invoice was raised, no site meeting minutes evidenced any complaint, no counterclaim was filed for alleged delay or defective works, and no evidence showed completion by another contractor. The Court of Appeal, on its own re-assessment, found the respondent's Director to be more credible than the appellant's Managing Director and concluded the Commissioner acted on correct principles.
Legal principles established
#- On a first appeal, the Court of Appeal must reconsider and assess the evidence and draw its own conclusions, while always remembering it neither saw nor heard the witnesses
- An appellate court will not normally interfere with a trial court's finding of fact unless it is based on no evidence, on a misapprehension of the evidence, or the judge demonstrably acted on a wrong principle
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the appeal are awarded to the respondent
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya, Milimani Commercial Courts at Nairobi
- H.C.C.C. No. 107 of 1999
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal to the Court of Appeal under the Civil Procedure Act and appellate jurisdiction over the High Court
Relief refused
#All four grounds of appeal challenging the trial court's findings of fact
The Court found the learned Commissioner acted on correct principles and saw no reason to interfere with her findings
Costs
Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent
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.
This is a first appeal and so this Court is obliged to reconsider the evidence assess it and make appropriate conclusions on such evidence, but always remembering that we have neither seen nor heard the witnesses
A Court of Appeal will not normally interfere with a finding of fact by the trial court unless it is based on no evidence or on a misapprehension of the evidence or the Judge is shown demonstrably to have acted on wrong principle in reaching the findings he did.
The upshot of that must be that this appeal fails and we order that it be and is hereby dismissed with costs thereof to the respondent. Those shall be the orders of this Court.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal inconsistency in the date of the judgment below: the title page states the judgment was 'dated 15th February, 2000' while the body of the judgment says it was 'delivered on 15th February, 2001'
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Manyonyi v African Medical and Research Foundation (Civil Appeal 330 of 2019) [2026] KECA 101 (KLR)[2026] KECA 101 (KLR)23 Jan 2026
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "RAMJI RATNA & COMPANY LIMITED v WOOD PRODUCTS (KENYA) LIMITED [2007] KECA 233 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2007). Civil Appeal 117 of 2001. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2007/233/eng@2007-10-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.