[2025] KESC 30 (KLR)

[2025] KESC 30 (KLR)

The Supreme Court held that its appellate jurisdiction under Article 163(4)(a) of the Constitution is strictly limited to cases where the Court of Appeal has determined issues involving the interpretation or application of the Constitution. In this matter, neither the High Court nor the Court of Appeal substantively...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KESC 30 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Mary Jacinta Chepkorir Kiptui; Respondent: Gladys J. Kiptiony
Court
Supreme Court
Court Station
Supreme Court of Kenya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
23 May 2025
Case Number
Petition E025 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Judges
PM Mwilu, MK Ibrahim, SC Wanjala, I Lenaola, W Ouko
Legal Topics
Appellate Jurisdiction, Right to Fair Hearing, Succession and Estate Administration, Natural Justice, Court Discretion, Access to Justice
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Family and Children Appellate Jurisdiction Right to Fair Hearing Succession and Estate Administration Natural Justice Court Discretion +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Jacinta Chepkorir Kiptui

Appellant

Gladys J. Kiptiony

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction under Article 163(4)(a) of the Constitution to entertain the appeal as of right on grounds of constitutional interpretation or application.
  2. 2 Whether the Court of Appeal erred by remitting the matter to the High Court without expressly setting aside the High Court's decision.
  3. 3 Whether mere allegations of constitutional violations or citation of constitutional provisions are sufficient to invoke the Supreme Court's jurisdiction under Article 163(4)(a).

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that its appellate jurisdiction under Article 163(4)(a) of the Constitution is strictly limited to cases where the Court of Appeal has determined issues involving the interpretation or application of the Constitution. In this matter, neither the High Court nor the Court of Appeal substantively addressed or determined constitutional questions; the Court of Appeal's reference to fair hearing was tangential and not the basis for its decision. The appellant's grievances, including the failure to set aside the High Court's order and the handling of costs, did not raise cogent constitutional controversies but rather procedural or discretionary matters. The Supreme Court...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Petition of Appeal No. E025 of 2024 consolidated with Petition of Appeal No. E026 of 2024 is dismissed.
  • The sum of Kshs 6,000 deposited as security for costs in each petition to be refunded to the petitioner.