Fred K. Sabai, Richard Kipsoi, Daniel Kapkara, Daniel Chemaket & Eliud Sichei v District Land Adjudication & Settlment Office, Trans-Nzoia, Attorney General, Peter Chemaswet, Nathan Jindet Ndiwa, James Boiyo Bello, Robinson Chesboi, Barnaba K. Kiteywo, Wilfred M. Cheprot, Juma William Chemosit, Peter Kibarak Kibet, John Kapkara Masai & Stanley Kipkoech; Stephen Yego Lang’at & Anthony Kemei Lang’at (Suing as administrators of the Estate of the late Lawrence Lang’at Kipsoi) (Objectors) (Land Case 107 of 2012) [2019] KEELC 895 (KLR)

Section 80 and Order 45 Rule 2 confine review to discovery of new and important matter, error apparent on the face of the record, or other sufficient reason. The applicants relied on the confirmation of grant in a succession cause, their occupation since 1996, and lack of notice of the suit - all facts outside the judgment. Per National Bank of Kenya v Ndungu Njau, an error for review must be self-evident without elaborate argument. The applicants' grievances could only be ventilated on appeal.

The applicants argued that Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act (res judicata) ousted jurisdiction because the High Court succession cause had bequeathed Plot 703 to them. The court held that neither the confirmation of grant, in which the defendants were not participants, nor the ouster argument, which was unknown to the court at judgment, could occasion review. No independent narrative of how the deceased obtained the land was offered.