Rosaline Tubei & 8 others v Patrick K. Cheruiyot & 3 others [2014] KEELC 413 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's courts cannot extend the strict 6-month deadline for asking to quash a tribunal or court decision, no matter how strong your case seems.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether time for seeking leave to apply for certiorari can be extended
No - the limitation is statutory and no power of extension exists
Order 50 Rule 5 allows enlargement of time limited by the Rules, but the 6-month limitation is also in Section 9(3) of the Law Reform Act, and rules made under statute cannot override a statutory provision. The Law Reform Act itself contains no extension provision, and the court found no law entitling it to enlarge time.
Whether Article 159(2)(d) can cure non-compliance with the limitation period
No - limitation of time is substantive law, not procedural technicality
The court held that provisions of limitation of time do not fall within the domain of technical rules of procedure addressed by Article 159(2)(d); they are part of substantive law, so the override clause does not assist applicants seeking extension of time.
Whether the applicants, who did not pursue the statutory appeal route, may invoke judicial review
Yes, they may pursue the prerogative order route, but subject to the limitation period
The court found that although the Land Disputes Tribunal Act provided an appeal to the Provincial Appeals Committee, the applicants' election to seek prerogative orders under the Law Reform Act and Civil Procedure Rules was entirely within their rights, but that avenue was time-barred.
Legal principles established
#- The 6-month limitation period for applications for certiorari under Section 9(3) of the Law Reform Act is substantive and cannot be overridden by rules of court or Article 159(2)(d)
- A court cannot grant leave to a party seeking to file a judicial review application out of time
Court orders
#- 1.The application for leave to commence judicial review out of time is refused
- 2.Leave to apply for an order of certiorari is refused
- 3.The application is dismissed
- 4.No orders as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 53 Rules 1(1), (2), (4), Rule 2 and Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010; Sections 8(2) and 9 of the Law Reform Act, Cap 26
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, "Rosaline Tubei & 8 others v Patrick K. Cheruiyot & 3 others [2014] KEELC 413 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Miscellaneous Application (Judicial Review), Eldoret. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2014/413/eng@2014-04-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.