County Government of Kisumu & another v Meptax Consultum Limited (Civil Appeal (Application) E026 of 2025) [2026] KECA 488 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal ruled that only a full bench of judges can review its own decisions, so the application was sent to a full bench.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicant is seeking leave to file an appeal out of time or review of the Court's decision of 28th November, 2025 striking out the appeal
- 2.Whether the Court has jurisdiction to entertain an application for review of a decision of the full bench of the Court
Key legal issues
#Characterisation of the application - out-of-time leave or review of a full-bench decision
Whichever characterisation is adopted, the thrust of the application is for review of the full bench's decision, which the single Judge cannot entertain.
The Court observed that the application was unclear as to whether it sought leave to file an appeal out of time or review of the decision of 28th November, 2025 striking out the appeal for want of leave under Rule 84(1). Reading the substance of the application, the Court held that in either view it amounted to a quest for review of a full-bench decision, a matter outside the jurisdiction of the Judge seised, requiring referral to a full Bench.
Legal principles established
#- A single Judge of the Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to review a decision of the full bench of the Court; such an application must be placed before a full Bench.
Court orders
#- 1.That the application be listed for hearing before a full Bench of the Court
- 2.That there be no orders as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal under the Court of Appeal Rules (Rule 84(1) invoked on the facts); the Court found it lacked jurisdiction to review its own decision
Relief refused
#Determination of the application by the single Judge as framed
The Court lacked the requisite jurisdiction to consider an application seeking review of a decision of the full bench
Costs
There shall be no orders as to costs.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Whichever way one looks at it, it is evident that the applicant is seeking, from the thrust of the applicant's application, for review of the decision of the full bench of this Court.
This Court lacks the requisite jurisdiction to consider the application. In the circumstances therefore, the application shall be listed for hearing before a full Bench of the Court.
There shall be no orders as to costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment text does not state the case title, case number or neutral citation, and the applicant is not named, limiting identification of the matter.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "County Government of Kisumu & another v Meptax Consultum Limited (Civil Appeal (Application) E026 of 2025) [2026] KECA 488 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/488/eng@2026-03-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.