Alugaya v Lusweti & another (Environment and Land Appeal E007 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 5175 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused to review its own contempt ruling, confirming that disagreements with a decision belong on appeal, not in review applications.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether an error apparent on the face of the record existed regarding cross-examination of the process server
No error apparent on the face of the record; the ruling correctly recorded that the applicant chose not to cross-examine the process server
The court re-read the 133-paragraph ruling of the trial judge, which at paragraphs 116, 91 and 103 recorded that the applicant was served on 10/4/2026 and, though present and claiming collusion, did not insist on cross-examining the process server or test his veracity. The record therefore addressed the service and cross-examination issues, leaving no error apparent on the face of the record to invoke Order 45 Rule 1.
Whether the court on review may re-evaluate the evidence on service and sentence
The court lacks jurisdiction on review to re-evaluate and re-assess the totality of the evidence; that would amount to sitting on its own appeal
The applicant in effect invited the court to re-open findings on the date of service and the proportionality of the sentence. The court held that disagreements with findings of fact or sentence are for appeal, not review, and that the court cannot act arbitrarily outside the four corners of the law even out of sympathy for the imprisoned applicant.
Legal principles established
#- Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act confers the power of review, while Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules supplies the guiding principles for its exercise
- A court cannot, on a review, re-evaluate and re-assess the totality of the evidence in its own ruling, as that would amount to sitting on its own appeal; grievances going to the substance of the decision are matters for appeal
Court orders
#- 1.The applicant's notice of motion dated 16/7/2026 is dismissed
- 2.No costs awarded owing to the circumstances of the case
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Alugaya v Lusweti & another (Environment and Land Appeal E007 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 5175 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Kitale ELC Appeal No. E007 of 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5175/eng@2026-07-31
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.