[2018] KECA 175 (KLR)

[2018] KECA 175 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Republic v Karisa Chengo and 2 Others, a judge of the Environment and Land Court lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine criminal appeals in the High Court. Since the first appellate court's bench included such a judge, the proceedings and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KECA 175 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: David Juma Atelu; Respondent: Republic
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Appeal 32 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Second Appellate Court (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; proceedings and judgment of the first appellate court declared a nullity; matter remitted to the High Court for re-hearing before a competent bench.
Judges
AM Githinji, GG Okwengu
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of High Court, Composition of Bench, Criminal Appeals, Environment and Land Court Jurisdiction
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Jurisdiction of High Court Composition of Bench Criminal Appeals Environment and Land Court Jurisdiction

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

David Juma Atelu

Appellant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Second Appellate Court (court of Appeal)

  1. 1 Whether a judge of the Environment and Land Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine a criminal appeal in the High Court.
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings and judgment of the first appellate court were valid given the composition of the bench.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Republic v Karisa Chengo and 2 Others, a judge of the Environment and Land Court lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine criminal appeals in the High Court. Since the first appellate court's bench included such a judge, the proceedings and judgment were a nullity. Consequently, there was no valid judgment upon which the appeal to the Court of Appeal could be anchored. The matter was therefore remitted to the High Court for a re-hearing of the first appeal before a properly constituted bench of judges with competent jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; proceedings and judgment of the first appellate court declared a nullity; matter remitted to the High Court for re-hearing before a competent bench.

Orders

  • The proceedings and judgment of the first appellate court are declared a nullity.
  • The matter is remitted to the High Court for re-hearing of the first appeal before a bench of judges with competent jurisdiction.