Syokimau Bright Homes & another (Suing on its Behalf and on Behalf of over 5,000 Members of Athi-River Local Community) v East African Portland Cement Company Limited & 273 others (Environment and Land Case 43 of 2019 & 155 of 2016 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELC 5715 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the court had power to review its judgment of 29th October 2024
No - no error apparent on the face of the record, no new and important matter, no sufficient reason for review, and the application was made with unreasonable delay
Order 45 Rule 1 and section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act require discovery of new and important matter, an error apparent on the face of the record, or other sufficient reason, and application without unreasonable delay. The court found no omission or error on the face of the record and held the applicant guilty of laches since the application was filed months after judgment.
Whether the applicant could prosecute its consolidated suit and application separately from the lead file
No - the matter was consolidated into Machakos ELC Case No. 155 of 2016 and could not be separately prosecuted
The applicant's suit was consolidated with five others under lead file Machakos ELC Case No. 155 of 2016, and the suit property was dealt with in that lead file, whose judgment was delivered by Lady Justice Christine Ochieng on 29th October 2024. The court agreed with the respondent that the matter could not be separately prosecuted.
Whether the court was functus officio after delivering final judgment
Yes - after final judgment the court lacks authority to re-engage with the merits, subject only to statutory exceptions such as section 99 for clerical errors
Relying on Telkom Kenya Ltd v John Ochanda and Raila Odinga & 2 Others v IEBC, the court held that the functus officio doctrine gives effect to finality: once final judgment is entered, the decision cannot be reviewed or varied by the decision maker, save for correcting clerical or arithmetical mistakes under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Legal principles established
#- Once final judgment has been entered, the court is functus officio and cannot revisit the matter on a merit-based re-engagement, save for the statutory exceptions
- An error or omission sufficient for review must be self-evident and require no elaborate argument; a different view of the matter or an erroneous exposition of the law is not a ground for review
- An application for review must be clear and specific on the basis upon which it is made
Court orders
#- 1.Application dismissed with costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 50 and 159 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010; Order 45 and Order 50 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Syokimau Bright Homes & another (Suing on its Behalf and on Behalf of over 5,000 Members of Athi-River Local Community) v East African Portland Cement Company Limited & 273 others (Environment and Land Case 43 of 2019 & 155 of 2016 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELC 5715 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Machakos ELC Case No. 43 of 2019 (formerly Nairobi ELC No. 1190 of 2015). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5715/eng@2025-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.