Risk Africa Innovatis Limited v Smartmatic International Holdings B.V.A & 3 others
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal struck out a procurement appeal filed late, confirming strict statutory deadlines cannot be extended.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Court's jurisdiction under section 175(4) of the PPAD Act survives the lapse of the prescribed timelines
The jurisdiction is time-bound; once the 7-day filing window and 45-day determination period lapse, the Court's jurisdiction is extinguished by effluxion of time and the appeal must be struck out.
The Court adopted its prior decisions in Aprim Consultants and Al Ghurair, holding section 175 plain and unambiguous with tight, sequential timelines admitting no interpretive wriggle room. The appeal filed on 12 January 2022 was far outside the 7-day window expiring 2 November 2021, and the 45-day period ended 17 December 2021, so jurisdiction had lapsed before filing.
Whether listing the appeal for hearing created a legitimate expectation of a merits determination
No; legitimate expectation cannot operate contrary to the law and cannot confer jurisdiction the statute has withdrawn.
The appellant argued that the Court's listing of the appeal created a legitimate expectation of a hearing on the merits. The Court rejected this, citing Communications Commission of Kenya v Royal Media Services, reiterating that legitimate expectation cannot override the law or revive a lapsed statutory jurisdiction.
Legal principles established
#- Under section 175(4) of the PPAD Act, an appeal to the Court of Appeal must be filed within 7 days of the High Court decision and determined within 45 days; when the 45-day period ends, the Court's jurisdiction ends by effluxion of time.
- A decision made without jurisdiction is a nullity ab initio and a court must down tools the moment it finds it lacks jurisdiction.
- Legitimate expectation cannot operate contrary to the law.
Court orders
#- 1.The 1st respondent's notice of motion dated 8th February 2022 is allowed
- 2.The appeal is struck out for want of jurisdiction
- 3.Costs of the application and appeal awarded to the 1st and 3rd respondents
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- Misc C.A Judicial Review No. E134 of 2021
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 175(4) and (5) of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, 2015 (time-bound appellate jurisdiction)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Risk Africa Innovatis Limited v Smartmatic International Holdings B.V.A & 3 others", Case Analysis (2022). Civil Appeal (Application) E008 of 2022. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2022/427/eng@2022-03-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.