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 AppealOtherElection Petition Appeal No. 27 of 2018· [2018] KECA 328 (KLR)

Hamdia Yaroi Sheikh Nuri v Faith Tumaini Kombe & 2 others [2018] KECA 328 (KLR)

Court of Appeal
21 September 2018
5,431 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~22 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that county assembly election disputes end at the High Court — no second appeal lies to it under the Elections Act.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This Court of Appeal judgment (Ouko, P, Musinga and Murgor, JJ.A) dismisses an appeal by Hamdia Yaroi Sheikh Nuri against a High Court decision by Kimaru, J, which had reversed a magistrates' court election petition that nullified Faith Tumaini Kombe's nomination to the Tana River County Assembly on grounds she was not a registered voter. The Court resolved the appeal on a single threshold question: its own jurisdiction. It held that under Article 164(3) of the Constitution, section 85A of the Elections Act and rule 4 of the Court of Appeal (Election Petition) Rules 2017, election appeals reach the Court of Appeal only where the dispute concerns membership of the National Assembly, Senate or the office of county governor, or where the High Court acted in its original jurisdiction. County assembly election petitions begin in the Resident Magistrate's Court under section 75(1A), with a single appeal to the High Court on matters of law under section 75(4); the legislature deliberately omitted any further appeal. Nor did the Article 164(3)(b) route through the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal apply, since the dispute did not originate there. Because the present appeal was a second appeal from a High Court appellate decision in a county assembly election petition, the Court lacked jurisdiction, 'downed its tools', and dismissed the appeal with costs to the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents. The merits grounds - competence of the record, extension of time for filings, and burden of proof on voter registration - were not determined. The judgment binds lower courts to treat county assembly election disputes as terminating at the High Court.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction over a second appeal in a county assembly election petition

Holding

It does not. Section 85A of the Elections Act confines election appeals to this Court to disputes concerning members of the National Assembly, Senate or county governors, and to appeals from the High Court acting in its original jurisdiction. Members of county assemblies are conspicuously absent, and no provision allows second appeals from High Court appeals against magistrates' court decisions.

Reasoning

Reading Article 164(3), sections 75 and 85A of the Elections Act and rule 4 of the Court of Appeal (Election Petition) Rules 2017 together, the scheme provides for one appeal only from the magistrates' court to the High Court on matters of law. The omission of any provision for further appeals is deliberate. The only other election appellate route, under Article 164(3)(b) and section 41(2) of the Political Parties Act, applies to PPDT-originated party disputes, which this was not.

p. 6
02

Jurisdiction must be strictly conferred by Constitution or statute

Holding

Adopting the Supreme Court's holding in Samuel Kamau Macharia, jurisdiction cannot be assumed or expanded by judicial craft; where the Constitution exhaustively provides for jurisdiction, the court must operate within those limits.

Reasoning

The Court applied the classic statement in Owners of the Motor Vessel 'Lilian S' and the Macharia principle that the limits of a court's authority are imposed by the statute or charter constituting it. Because the electoral statutes did not donate jurisdiction over this category of dispute, entertaining the appeal would exceed the statutorily imposed jurisdiction.

p. 4
03

Whether the High Court's record of appeal was incompetent, whether the High Court wrongly interfered with the trial court's discretion on late filings, and whether the appellant proved non-registration

Holding

Not determined. These issues were never reached because the jurisdictional question disposed of the appeal.

Reasoning

The Court held that the jurisdictional question could well dispose of the entire appeal and, having found that it lacked jurisdiction, declined to address the merits, including the competence of the record, the extension of time, and the burden of proof regarding the 1st respondent's voter registration.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • The Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction to hear appeals from the High Court in election petitions concerning members of county assembly that originated in the magistrates' court; section 85A of the Elections Act limits election appeals to this Court to those concerning membership of the National Assembly, Senate or the office of county governor, or appeals from the High Court acting in its original jurisdiction.
  • A court cannot assume appellate jurisdiction where none has been specifically granted by the Constitution or statute.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal was dismissed for want of jurisdiction
  2. 2.Costs awarded to the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 87(1)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 105
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 159
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 164(3)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 193(1)(a)
  • Elections Actsection 25(1)(a)
  • Elections Actsection 75(1A), (2), (4)
  • Elections Actsection 85A
  • Elections (Parliamentary and County Elections) Petition Rules 2017rule 35
  • Court of Appeal (Election Petition) Rules 2017rules 4 and 5
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2010referred to generally
  • Political Parties Actsection 41(2) (referred to as Political Parties Disputes Tribunal Act)

Cases cited (8)

  • Samuel Kamau Macharia vs Kenya Commercial Bank
    [2012] eKLR; SC. App. No. 2 of 2011
  • Republic vs Danson Mugunya
    [2016] eKLR
  • Wilson Ong'ele Ochola vs Orange Democratic Movement and 3 Others
    Civil Appeal No 271 of 2017
  • Isaac Oerri Abiri vs Samwel Nyang'au Nyanchama & 2 Others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Owners of the Motor Vessel "Lilian S" vs Caltex Oil (Kenya) Limited
    [1989] KLR 1
  • Samuel Omondi Okumu vs Joshua Okumu Nyabolah
    [2017] eKLR
  • Linnet Kemunto Nyakeriga & Another vs Ben Njoroge & 2 Others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Moses Mwicigi & 14 others vs Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 5 Others
    [2016] eKLR
On appeal from
High Court at Milimani, Nairobi
Election Petition Appeal No. 5 of 2018 (consolidated with Election Petition No. 1 of 2017)
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 164(3) of the Constitution, read with section 85A of the Elections Act and rule 4 of the Court of Appeal (Election Petition) Rules 2017 - the Court found it had NO jurisdiction

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.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Hamdia Yaroi Sheikh Nuri v Faith Tumaini Kombe & 2 others [2018] KECA 328 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Election Petition Appeal No. 27 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2018/328/eng@2018-09-21

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