[2018] KECA 819 (KLR)

[2018] KECA 819 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal found that the High Court judge who heard and determined the appellant's criminal appeal was appointed to the Environment and Land Court and, as per the Supreme Court's decision in Republic vs Karisa Chengo & 2 Others [2017] eKLR, lacked jurisdiction to hear criminal appeals. Consequently, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KECA 819 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Peter Eregai; Respondent: Republic
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Appeal 102 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; appeal remitted to High Court for re-hearing.
Judges
AM Githinji, GG Okwengu, A Mohammed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of High Court, Sexual Offences, Criminal Appeals, Nullity of Proceedings
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Jurisdiction of High Court Sexual Offences Criminal Appeals Nullity of Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Eregai

Appellant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment to Court of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether a judge appointed to 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 High Court in this matter are a nullity due to lack of jurisdiction.
  3. 3 Whether the appeal should be remitted to the High Court for re-hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that the High Court judge who heard and determined the appellant's criminal appeal was appointed to the Environment and Land Court and, as per the Supreme Court's decision in Republic vs Karisa Chengo & 2 Others [2017] eKLR, lacked jurisdiction to hear criminal appeals. Consequently, the proceedings and judgment of the High Court were a nullity. The Court of Appeal determined that the appropriate remedy was to set aside the High Court judgment and remit the appeal for re-hearing before a competent judge of the High Court, as the original trial in the subordinate court was not impugned and only the appellate proceedings were affected by the jurisdictional defect.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; appeal remitted to High Court for re-hearing.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The judgment of the High Court dated 11th November, 2013 is set aside.