Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedELC Appeal No. 01 of 2019· [2024] KEELC 3922 (KLR)

Chesebe (Being the personal representative of the Estate of Ndiwa Chesebe Meini) v Sikuku (Environment and Land Appeal 01 of 2019) [2024] KEELC 3922 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
24 April 2024
2,088 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court in Bungoma dismissed a bid to review a land decree, confirming a court that has delivered judgment cannot reopen the matter.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By Notice of Motion dated 17th August 2023, the applicant, claiming to act under a power of attorney as personal representative of Ndiwa Chesebe, sought a finding on whether decrees in ELC Appeal No. 1 of 2019 and Kimilili PMCC No. 2 of 2011 were properly executed, and a review of the decree/order of 21st July 2022 which directed subdivision of land parcel Elgon/Kaptama/610, whereas the suit land adjudged in the appeal was Elgon/Kaptama/459 from which 10 acres were to be excised for the respondent. The respondent opposed, arguing the applicant was a stranger (the power of attorney postdated nothing relevant and leave to substitute was never sought), that the application was filed in the wrong forum since the order sought to be reviewed was issued by the subordinate court, that there was inordinate delay, and that the order was not attached. The court framed two issues: whether the orders sought could issue, and costs. It held that having fully determined the appeal by judgment delivered on 23rd March 2022, it was functus officio; it could not review an order issued by the trial court, its jurisdiction lying only in appeals. Further, the applicant lacked proper audience: the notice to act in person was filed after judgment without leave or consent contrary to Order 9 Rule 9, and no permission to substitute the party under the power of attorney had been obtained, rendering the applicant a stranger to the proceedings. The application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the ELC could review the subordinate court's decree

Holding

The court was functus officio having fully determined the appeal, and lacked jurisdiction to review a trial court order; grievances lay on appeal only.

Reasoning

The court noted its appellate mandate is to re-evaluate the evidence and determine whether the trial magistrate's conclusions stand. Having delivered its judgment on 23rd March 2022 fully disposing of the appeal, nothing remained before it. Any complaint about the decree issued by the subordinate court on 21st July 2022 had to be pursued before that court or on appeal, not by an application before the appellate court.

p. 4
02

Whether the applicant had proper audience before the court

Holding

The applicant was a stranger to the proceedings: the notice to act in person was filed without leave or consent as required by Order 9 Rule 9, and no leave was obtained to substitute the original party via the power of attorney.

Reasoning

Judgment in the trial court was entered on 5th May 2015 while the party was represented by M/S Simiyu Wafula & Company Advocates. The notice to act in person dated 5th January 2016 was therefore ineffective without a court order or consent. Further, the process by which Kipyegon Ndiwa Chesebe assumed the applicant's role was unclear, as substitution permission was never sought or obtained as mandated by law.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A first appellate court becomes functus officio once it fully determines the appeal and cannot review orders of the trial court
  • A party who previously engaged an advocate may not act in person after judgment without leave of court or consent under Order 9 Rule 9

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 17th August 2023 is dismissed with costs to the Respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 9 Rule 9

Cases cited (9)

  • Abok James Odera t/a A.J Odera & Associates v John Patrick Machira t/a Machira & Co. Advocates
    [2013] eKLR
  • Mombasa Bricks & Tiles Ltd & 5 Others v Arvind Shah & 7 Others
    [2018] eKLR
  • Telkom Kenya Limited v John Ochanda (Suing on his Own Behalf and on Behalf of 996 Former Employees of Telkom Kenya Limited)
    [2014] eKLR
  • Raila Odinga & 2 Others v Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission & 3 Others
    [2013] eKLR
  • Daniel Otieno Migore v South Nyanza Sugar Co. Ltd
    Migori HCCA No. 52 of 2017
  • Philmark Systems Co. Ltd v Andermote Enterprises
    Kisumu HCCA No. 18 of 2017
  • Khalif Sheikh Adan v The Hon. Attorney General
    Garisa ELC Court No. 20 of 2018
  • James Bosire Mochogu v John Kipkirui Chepkwony
    Bomet HCCA No. E39 of 2021
  • Hosea Nyandika Mosagwe & 2 Others v County Gov't of Nyamira
    (2022) eKLR
On appeal from
Principal Magistrate's Court, Kimilili
Kimilili PMCC Case No. 2 of 2011
Jurisdiction invoked
Appellate jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court under the ELC Act over appeals from subordinate courts

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Chesebe (Being the personal representative of the Estate of Ndiwa Chesebe Meini) v Sikuku (Environment and Land Appeal 01 of 2019) [2024] KEELC 3922 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). ELC Appeal No. 01 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/3922/eng@2024-04-24

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.