Alicaranda Wathitha Gatei v Zipporah Wangechi Muturi & 2 others [2021] KEELC 2125 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land court refused to review its own judgment, confirming that disagreements with a ruling must go to appeal, not review.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the grounds raised disclosed an error apparent on the face of the record justifying review
They did not; the grounds required lengthy reasoning and were contested by the Respondent, and thus amounted at most to erroneous decisions appealable, not reviewable errors.
The court set out the three grounds for review under Section 80 CPA and Order 45 rule 1, and the case law requiring that an error apparent be self-evident and not depend on long drawn reasoning. The Applicants' own submissions went into painful detail on marriage presumption, proof of fraud and defective titles, which is precisely the long-drawn process of reasoning that disqualifies a ground from being an error on the face of the record.
Whether the application was rendered incompetent by reference to an appeal that had been filed
The court noted the notice of appeal had been withdrawn before the motion was filed, but the motion itself incorrectly asserted an appeal had been proffered; the court nonetheless proceeded to determine the review on its merits.
The court observed that the notice of appeal filed on 1st July 2019 was withdrawn on 27th August 2019, before the notice of motion of 13th November 2019, yet the motion's grounds still stated an appeal had been proffered to the appellate court, casting doubt on the competence of the drafting.
Legal principles established
#- An erroneous conclusion of law or evidence is a ground for appeal, not for review
- An error apparent on the face of the record must be self-evident and not require long-drawn reasoning; where two opinions are possible, the proper remedy is appeal
- The proper way to correct a judge's alleged misapprehension of law or wrongful exercise of discretion is to appeal unless the error is apparent on the face of the record
Court orders
#- 1.The Applicants' Notice of Motion dated 13th November 2019 seeking review of the judgment of 28th June 2019 is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the Plaintiff/Respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21 and Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 (application for review)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Alicaranda Wathitha Gatei v Zipporah Wangechi Muturi & 2 others [2021] KEELC 2125 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment text provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/2125/eng@2021-07-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.