Mayieka & 22 others v Judicial Service Commission (Civil Appeal (Application) 187 of 2019) [2023] KECA 1201 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed it can review its own decisions, but refused to overturn a stay order, blaming the parties for hiding their settlement from the court.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to review its own decision
The Court has residual jurisdiction to review its own rulings, exercising the powers vested in the High Court
Section 3(2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act vests in the Court of Appeal, for purposes incidental to the hearing and determination of appeals, the power, authority and jurisdiction of the High Court. Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act permits an aggrieved person to seek review of an order from the court which made it. Benjoh Amalgamated confirms this residual jurisdiction, to be exercised cautiously in cases of error occasioning real injustice.
Whether the applicants made out a case for review on the ground of new facts
No case for review was made out; the stay order was correct when made and the parties' undisclosed settlement could not justify disturbing it
The JSC's subsequent change of position and offer to pay the petitioners, and the petitioners' acceptance, were facts the parties failed to place before the court when the stay application was determined. Had the court been informed, it would not have determined the application. The court cannot vacate a correctly made order merely because of the parties' own failure of disclosure.
The finality principle versus the justice principle in review applications
The finality principle should be upheld as much as possible to bring litigation to an end; review is exceptional
Finality of litigation serves public interest in conclusiveness, while the justice principle requires doing justice to parties to sustain public confidence in the judiciary. Benjoh Amalgamated, Taylor v Lawrence and Mukuru Munge establish that reopening decided matters is a circumscribed, exceptional power exercised cautiously.
Legal principles established
#- The Court of Appeal has residual jurisdiction to review its own decisions, derived from Section 3(2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act, but that jurisdiction is exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances to avoid real injustice
- Review jurisdiction must be balanced against the finality principle; litigation should be brought to an end and review granted only where injustice demands it
Court orders
#- 1.The application for review of the ruling of 3rd November 2022 is dismissed
- 2.Each party to bear their own costs of the application
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- null
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 3(2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act read with Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act (residual jurisdiction to review own decisions)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mayieka & 22 others v Judicial Service Commission (Civil Appeal (Application) 187 of 2019) [2023] KECA 1201 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in judgment (application dated 9th December 2022). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2023/1201/eng@2023-10-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.