Mwangi & 3 others v Karanja & another (Environment & Land Case 386 of 2011) [2023] KEELC 929 (KLR)

The court restated the settled framework that Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act confers the power of review while Order 45 restricts its grounds: discovery of new matter, error apparent on the face of the record, or any other sufficient reason, brought without undue delay. Applying Indian and East African authority, it held that an apparent error must be self-evident, needing no elaborate argument. Finding the applicant's complaints qualified within the prescribed grounds, and the 62-day delay not unreasonable, the court exercised its discretion in the applicant's favour.

Both parties conceded the suit was compromised by the consent of December 5, 2012, which was adopted as a judgment and which provided that upon payment of Kshs 33,000 per plot the defendants would execute transfers and issue titles. The consent order terminated all further litigation, so there could be no trial to elaborate disputed allegations. The later consent of August 31, 2021 was never adopted as an order of the court. Binding authority on consent orders led the court to enforce the December 2012 consent through a mandatory order.

The court found that although the 2011 handwritten authority to plead was only filed in June 2012, it was properly on record, since elevating such procedural technicalities would impede justice under Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution and Section 19(1) of the Environment and Land Court Act. The 1st Plaintiff had filed and served a notice of intention to act in person under Order 9 Rules 5, 6 and 8, so prayer (2) was granted subject to service of the notice on the former advocate.