[2025] KEHC 2616 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 2616 (KLR)

The court declined to determine the application to adduce new evidence because the presiding judge had already expressed views in a similar matter, which could compromise the perception of impartiality. To maintain fairness and the integrity of the judicial process, the judge recused himself and directed that the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 2616 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Commissioner of Customs And Border Control; Respondent: Golosec System Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Income Tax Appeal 203 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Income Tax Appeal / Ruling on Application to Adduce New Evidence on Appeal
Outcome
Application not determined; matter referred to Presiding Judge for further directions due to recusal.
Judges
A Mabeya
Legal Topics
Adduction of Fresh Evidence, Customs Classification, Appeals Process
Source Language
en
Tax Law Civil Procedure Adduction of Fresh Evidence Customs Classification Appeals Process

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner of Customs And Border Control

Appellant

Golosec System Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Income Tax Appeal / Ruling on Application to Adduce New Evidence on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the court should allow the introduction of new evidence on appeal, specifically the decision and amendments from the Harmonised System Committee of the World Customs Organization.
  2. 2 Whether the presiding judge should recuse himself due to prior expression of views in a similar matter.

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to determine the application to adduce new evidence because the presiding judge had already expressed views in a similar matter, which could compromise the perception of impartiality. To maintain fairness and the integrity of the judicial process, the judge recused himself and directed that the matter be placed before the Presiding Judge of the Commercial & Tax Division for further directions, including the possibility of reassignment to another judge for a second opinion. The court did not address the merits of the application to introduce new evidence, focusing solely on the issue of recusal and proper judicial conduct.

Court Disposition

Application not determined; matter referred to Presiding Judge for further directions due to recusal.

Orders

  • The files are returned to the Presiding Judge of the Commercial & Tax Division, Nairobi, to give further directions, including the possibility of reassignment to another judge.