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 AppealDismissedCertification Application dated 20th December 2023 arising from Nakuru Civil Appeal No. 200 of 2018· [2025] KECA 1792 (KLR)

Samuel Peter Gitau Karanja v Hanna Njeri Mugi

Court of Appeal
31 October 2025
2,391 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~10 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal refused to let a private land dispute reach the Supreme Court, ruling that public interest alone does not justify such an appeal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nakuru (Warsame, Mativo & Odunga, JJA) on an application dated 20th December 2023 by Samuel Peter Gitau Karanja seeking certification that his intended appeal to the Supreme Court involves a matter of general public importance, together with leave to file a notice of appeal out of time. The intended appeal targets the Court of Appeal's judgment of 22nd September 2023 in Nakuru Civil Appeal No. 200 of 2018, which dismissed his appeal against the High Court's (J. N. Mulwa, J.) decision upholding Hannah Njeri Mugi's title to plot Dundori/Lanet/5/17 'A' (Plot 71) as transmittee of a bona fide interest from the original allottee S. M. Gichua through Michael Waweru to the deceased, Joseph Kimuhu Githengere. The applicant framed the matter as one of 'great public interest' concerning Article 162(2) and the jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court. Applying the parameters in Hermanus Phillipus Steyn v Giovanni Gnecchi-Ruscone, the court held that great public interest is not a certification ground; the only purported point of law - ELC jurisdiction - was never raised or determined below; and the remaining issues were factual disputes between two private parties in which the public had no interest. The application was dismissed with costs to the respondent. The underlying appeal was not disturbed by this ruling.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a private land dispute, characterised by the applicant as involving 'great public interest' and the jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court under Article 162(2), qualifies as a matter of general public importance for certification

Holding

It does not. The applicant failed to identify a precise, substantial point of law that arose and was determined in the courts below; the dispute was a two-party land dispute with no public-interest dimension.

Reasoning

The court applied the seven Steyn parameters. The only arguable point of law - ELC jurisdiction under Article 162(2) - was not raised before the trial court or the Court of Appeal, so it failed the requirement that the question have arisen below and been the subject of judicial determination. The framing as 'great public interest' was conceptually wrong, and the remaining complaints were factual, which cannot ground certification. The court saw the application as an attempt at a third bite at the cherry.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Great public interest is not a ground for certification; an applicant must prove that the case involves a matter of general public importance as defined in Article 163(4) and the Steyn parameters.
  • A question of law cannot be raised for the first time in a certification application; it must have arisen and been judicially determined in the courts below.
  • Determinations of fact in contests between private parties do not, by themselves, justify certification of an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The certification application dated 20th December 2023 was dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondent
On appeal from
Court of Appeal (Nakuru)
Nakuru Civil Appeal No. 200 of 2018
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 163(4) of the Constitution - certification that a matter of general public importance is involved, as a precondition to an appeal to the Supreme Court

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Samuel Peter Gitau Karanja v Hanna Njeri Mugi", Case Analysis (2025). Certification Application dated 20th December 2023 arising from Nakuru Civil Appeal No. 200 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/1792/eng@2025-10-31

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