Mukuru Munge v Gilied Mwanyasi (Environment & Land Case 387 of 2016) [2018] KEELC 406 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court in Mombasa dismissed an application to review an earlier ruling, confirming that a party unhappy with a court's decision should appeal rather than seek review.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the failure to refer to H.C. Civil Appeal No. 93 of 2005 in the ruling of 20th April 2017 constituted an error on the face of the record warranting review
No error on the face of the record; the ruling of 20th April 2017 was not reviewable.
The applicant contended the prior judge overlooked H.C. Civil Appeal No. 93 of 2005, in which the applicant was successful. On reading that judgment, the court found the issues there were whether the High Court had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and whether the respondent was entitled to Kshs 57,600 for a demolished structure. Ownership of the plot was neither in issue nor determined, so its omission from the ruling caused no error capable of review.
Whether the court could review the findings of Komingoi J that the suit was time barred and res judicata
No; the remedy was appeal, not review, as those findings were made by a court of concurrent jurisdiction.
Komingoi J had struck out the suit as time barred and res judicata, findings upheld through the appellate chain. The court held that a judge of concurrent jurisdiction cannot reverse such findings on review; the proper remedy was an appeal. The motion therefore did not fall within the ambit of review and lacked merit, warranting dismissal with costs.
Legal principles established
#- A party aggrieved by a finding of a court of concurrent jurisdiction on matters going to the root of the decision must appeal; such a finding cannot be reversed on review.
- A determination on ownership that was not in issue or decided in a prior appeal cannot be relied on as such in a later proceeding.
- Special damages must be both specifically pleaded and strictly proved.
Court orders
#- 1.The application for review dated 5th July 2017 is dismissed
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Review jurisdiction of the court over its own ruling (application dated 5th July 2017); the judgment does not cite a specific constitutional or statutory provision
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, "Mukuru Munge v Gilied Mwanyasi (Environment & Land Case 387 of 2016) [2018] KEELC 406 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/406/eng@2018-12-19
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.