Peter G.n. Ng’ang’a v Daniel Gichanga Kariuki (t/a Watts Enterprises (firm) & 24 others
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed you cannot use a constitutional application to overturn another judge's ruling you already lost or abandoned on appeal.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Precision in pleading constitutional violations
Constitutional allegations must be pleaded with reasonable precision, identifying the provision infringed and the manner of infringement.
The court endorsed the Anarita Karimi Njeru standard, as restated in Mumo Matemo, holding that precision in pleadings defines issues for adjudication but is not exactitude. The appellant's motion before Ochieng', J. was premised on broad grounds that the decision of Ringera, J. condemned him unheard, without precise identification of a constitutional contravention.
Jurisdiction to review a coordinate court's decision via constitutional reference
A High Court judge cannot entertain a constitutional application that seeks review of the merits of another judge's ruling; the section 84 jurisdiction, if it lies, extends only to procedural impropriety in obtaining the ruling.
Following Peter Ng'ang'a Muiruri v Credit Bank, the court held that allowing a party defeated by a ruling to re-litigate it as a constitutional reference would create an absurd loop of appeals and reviews with no end to litigation. Ochieng', J. correctly declined jurisdiction and the decision below was affirmed.
Consequences of withdrawal of a pending appeal
A party who voluntarily withdraws an appeal challenging a ruling cannot thereafter pursue the same relief in a different forum; blame for the collapse of the challenge rests on the appellant.
The appellant had been given an injunction pending appeal by this Court, but withdrew Civil Appeal No. 55 of 2003, claiming a defective notice of appeal. Having reached a dead end by his own election, he resorted to a constitutional challenge as an unusual route, which the court held was a back door way of attacking the ruling in a wrong forum.
Legal principles established
#- Allegations of violation of fundamental rights must be pleaded with reasonable precision, with specificity as to the provisions violated and the manner of violation.
- A judge of the High Court has no jurisdiction, including under a constitutional application purporting to invoke section 84 of the former Constitution, to review or sit on appeal over a decision of a judge of coordinate jurisdiction.
- A party who withdraws an appeal challenging a ruling cannot resuscitate the same challenge in the High Court as a constitutional reference; that route is an abuse of process and a usurpation of power.
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal dismissed with costs
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Milimani
- H.C.C.C No. 40 of 2003
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appellate jurisdiction over a decision of the High Court rendered in a constitutional reference under section 84 of the former Constitution
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Peter G.n. Ng’ang’a v Daniel Gichanga Kariuki (t/a Watts Enterprises (firm) & 24 others", Case Analysis (2015). Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2006. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2015/694/eng@2015-05-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.