Okoiti v Portside Freight Terminals Limited & 12 others
The bottom line
#Supreme Court corrects a typo to confirm KPA's grain facility license was unconstitutional.
What this practically means
#The Supreme Court fixed a clerical error in its June 2025 judgment. The original order accidentally left out the word 'wayleave' when declaring that Kenya Ports Authority's decision to grant Portside Freight Terminals a license was unconstitutional. The court's earlier finding had clearly included 'license and wayleave.' This correction does not change the judgment's substance—it simply makes the final order match what the court intended all along.
Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the omission of the words 'and wayleave' from Order No. (iii) in paragraph 175 of the Judgment dated 30th June 2025 constitutes a clerical error or accidental slip apparent on the face of the record.
- 2.Whether the Court should exercise its power under the slip rule to correct the omission.
Key legal issues
#Whether the omission of the words 'and wayleave' from the final order constitutes a clerical error correctable under the slip rule.
Yes, the omission is a clerical error apparent on the face of the judgment, as the finding in paragraph 173(v) included the words 'and wayleave' but the final order in paragraph 175(iii) omitted them, and the correction aligns the order with the court's intention.
The court noted that the finding in paragraph 173(v) expressly stated that the decision of KPA to grant Portside 'the license and wayleave' was unconstitutional, but the final order in paragraph 175(iii) omitted the words 'and wayleave.' This omission was a clerical error or accidental slip, as the court's intention was clear from the finding. The correction does not alter the substance of the judgment but merely aligns the order with the court's true intention. The court emphasized that the slip rule under Section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act allows correction of such errors to achieve logical or clerical perfection, and that the error was self-evident and its rectification would not reopen the judgment.
Legal principles established
#- The slip rule allows courts to fix obvious clerical mistakes without reopening the case.
- A correction must be self-evident from the judgment's own findings and reasoning.
- Correcting an error cannot change the substance of the decision or act as an appeal.
- The court's true intention, as shown in its reasoning, governs what the final order should say.
- Section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act gives the court power to perfect its orders for logical clarity.
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 28th July, 2025 be and is hereby allowed.
- 2.The Judgment dated 30th June 2025 is hereby corrected to include the words 'and wayleave' in paragraph 175 Order No. iii, which shall now read as follows: 'The decision of KPA to grant Portside the license and wayleave to establish a second grain bulk facility through the Specially Permitted Procurement Procedure under Section 114A of the PPAD Act was inconsistent with Articles 10(2)(c), 201 (a) and 227 (1) of the Constitution.'
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act, Cap 9B; Rules 28(5) and (6) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2020; Article 159 of the Constitution
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The error to be corrected must be self-evident, and its rectification should not grant the Court any authority to sit on appeal over its own judgment, ruling, or order, nor should it amount to a substantive review that alters the decision itself.
The Court may correct any clerical mistake, accidental slip, or omission, or vary its judgment, ruling, or order to reflect its true intention, essentially guiding the decision 'towards logical or clerical perfection.'
Each party to bear its own costs of this Application.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Use slip rule for obvious errors
When drafting final orders, cross-check every word against the judgment's findings. If an omission is clear from the reasoning, file a slip rule application under Section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act. The court will correct it without rehearing, saving time and costs. Ensure your application highlights the self-evident nature of the error.
Check final orders for accuracy
If you are a party in a case, review the final court order carefully against the judgment's reasoning. A missing word like 'wayleave' can change what is legally prohibited. Here, the correction confirmed that both the license and the wayleave for the grain facility were unconstitutional, which may affect Portside's operations and KPA's future procurement processes.
Court errors can be fixed simply
If you notice a clear mistake in a court order—like a missing word that contradicts the judge's own findings—you can ask the court to correct it without a full appeal. This ruling shows that the Supreme Court will fix such errors quickly. Just file a simple application pointing out the discrepancy, and the court will align the order with its true intention.
Frequently asked questions
#What is the slip rule in Kenya?+
The slip rule, under Section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act, lets a court correct clerical mistakes or accidental omissions in its judgments or orders. It is used for obvious errors that do not change the substance of the decision, like a missing word. The correction must be self-evident from the judgment itself.
Can the Supreme Court change its judgment after it is delivered in Kenya?+
Generally, no—a court cannot reopen or alter its final judgment. However, the slip rule allows minor corrections for clerical errors or accidental slips. This does not count as changing the judgment; it only fixes the order to match what the court clearly intended, as shown in its reasoning.
What did the Okiya Omtatah vs KPA case decide about the grain facility license?+
The Supreme Court ruled that KPA's decision to grant Portside Freight Terminals a license and wayleave for a second grain bulk facility was unconstitutional. The correction confirmed that both the license and wayleave were invalid, affecting how KPA must handle future procurement under the Constitution.
How do I apply for a slip rule correction in Kenya?+
File a notice of motion in the same court that issued the judgment. Clearly point out the clerical error or omission, and show how it contradicts the court's own findings. The court will decide if the error is self-evident and correct it without rehearing the case. Legal advice is recommended.
Later judgments citing this (2)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Director of Public Prosecutions v Mutua & another (Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Case E027 of 2024) [2025] KEMC 197 (KLR)[2025] KEMC 197 (KLR)22 Aug 2025applied
- Ajemo & another v Ojala (Civil Appeal E029 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 5072 (KLR)[2025] KEELC 5072 (KLR)18 Jun 2025applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Okoiti v Portside Freight Terminals Limited & 12 others", Case Analysis (2025). Petition (Application) E011 of 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.orghttps://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kesc/2025/67/eng@2025-11-14
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.