Kenya Case Law

Opicho v Republic

Opicho v Republic [2025] KEHC 10514 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Revision E126 of 2023

Judge

RC Rutto

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to review or revise a sentence imposed by another judge of concurrent jurisdiction in the exercise of original jurisdiction. The applicant's remedy lies in appealing to the Court of Appeal, not in seeking revision from a court of equal standing. The law prohibits a judge from sitting in review or appeal of a decision made by another judge of the same court. The application for sentence revision is therefore incompetent and must be dismissed. Additionally, the applicant may pursue alternative remedies such as a petition for mercy under Article 133 of the Const…

Source excerpt

• Murder Sentencing
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Sentence Revision
• Concurrent Jurisdiction

Jona v Republic

Jona v Republic [2025] KEHC 10598 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Miscellaneous Criminal Revision E129 of 2024

Judge

RC Rutto

The High Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review or revise the applicant's sentence because the Court of Appeal had already considered and affirmed both the conviction and the sentence, including the issue of time spent in remand custody. The trial court had expressly stated that it took into account the period spent in remand when imposing the 25-year sentence, and the Court of Appeal confirmed this finding, dismissing the applicant's argument to the contrary. As a result, the sentence became that of the Court of Appeal, and the High Court was functus officio and precluded from revi…

Source excerpt

• Sentence Revision
• Remand Custody Credit
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Functus Officio
• Appeal Process
• Statutory Compliance

Gamachu Construction Limited v Agricultural Finance Corporation & another; Equilog Enterprises Limited (Interested Party)

Gamachu Construction Limited v Agricultural Finance Corporation & another; Equilog Enterprises Limited (Interested Party) [2025] KEHC 10237 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Commercial Suit 708 of 2024

Judge

JK Ng'arng'ar

The High Court dismissed a bid by a successful auction purchaser for land-related declarations and transfer orders, holding the dispute lay within the Environment and Land Court.

• Statutory Power Of Sale
• Public Auction Procedure
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Injunctive Relief
• Transfer Of Property
• Matrimonial Property Rights

Ochoro v Republic

Ochoro v Republic [2025] KEHC 10221 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Miscellaneous Criminal Application E104 of 2024

Judge

RN Nyakundi

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to review or alter a sentence that has already been the subject of an appeal and determination by a judge of concurrent jurisdiction. Entertaining the application would amount to sitting on appeal over a decision of a peer, which is prohibited by law and the doctrine of functus officio. The applicant's grounds for sentence review were previously raised and conclusively determined in a prior appeal. The only recourse for further challenge lies with the Court of Appeal, not the High Court. Consequently, the application for resentencing is dismissed for want of…

Source excerpt

• Sentence Review
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Functus Officio
• Sexual Offences
• Appeals Process

Muiruri & another v Republic

Muiruri & another v Republic [2025] KEHC 10425 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Petition E002 of 2023

Judge

TW Ouya

The High Court at Murang'a dismissed a resentencing application, holding it lacked jurisdiction because the applicants had exhausted appeal channels and the court was functus officio.

• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Resentencing Applications
• Functus Officio Principle
• Robbery With Violence
• Post Conviction Review
• Criminal-resentencing

In re Estate of Esinas Angunzuzu Kalega alias Asenath Angunzuzu Khalekha (Deceased)

In re Estate of Esinas Angunzuzu Kalega alias Asenath Angunzuzu Khalekha (Deceased) [2025] KEHC 10303 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Miscellaneous Application E005 of 2023

Judge

JN Kamau

The High Court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the Objector's Summons for Revocation of Grant because the original succession cause was properly before the magistrate's court, which had the requisite pecuniary jurisdiction. The Objector should have sought revocation in the trial court or appealed any adverse decision to the High Court. The High Court's jurisdiction is limited to appeals or matters where the lower court lacks jurisdiction. Since the application was not an appeal and the magistrate's court had jurisdiction, the High Court could not proceed. The court further…

Source excerpt

• Revocation Of Grant
• Probate And Administration
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Pecuniary Jurisdiction
• Fraud In Succession
• Procedure For Succession Disputes

Pumwani Riyadha Mosque Committee & another v Gikomba Business Centre Limited

Pumwani Riyadha Mosque Committee & another v Gikomba Business Centre Limited [2025] KECA 1257 (KLR)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal E965 of 2024

Judges

K M'Inoti, LA Achode, WK Korir

The Court of Appeal held that the dispute between the parties, arising from a lease agreement over land and involving alleged breach of contract and specific performance, was fundamentally a land use and occupation matter. Applying the 'predominant test' and relevant statutory provisions, the Court found that such disputes fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court under Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act. The High Court therefore lacked jurisdiction to entertain the respondent’s suit. The Court further held…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Arbitration Clauses
• Breach Of Contract
• Specific Performance
• Material Non Disclosure

Magarini Amani Community Self Help Group & 6 others v Water Resources Authority & 3 others

Magarini Amani Community Self Help Group & 6 others v Water Resources Authority & 3 others [2025] KEHC 10349 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Constitutional Petition E024 of 2024

Judge

M Thande

The High Court determined that it possesses jurisdiction under Article 165(3) of the Constitution to hear and determine constitutional questions, including the constitutionality of subsidiary legislation and alleged violations of fundamental rights, even where the subject matter relates to natural resources. However, the Court found that the issues raised in the present petition—specifically, the challenge to the imposition of water use charges for salt extraction from seawater—were directly and substantially in issue in the prior case of Krystalline Salt Limited v Water Resources Management…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Res Judicata
• Water Resource Regulation
• Subsidiary Legislation Constitutionality
• Public Resources
• Collateral Estoppel

Patel v Shah

Patel v Shah [2025] KECA 1259 (KLR)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Application E174 of 2025

Judges

K M'Inoti, M Ngugi, LA Achode

The Court of Appeal dismissed an application for stay and conservatory orders, holding that a negative High Court ruling could not be stayed and that conservatory relief was unavailable.

• Stay Of Execution
• Conservatory Orders
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Appeals Process
• Compliance With Court Orders
• Stay-of-execution

Kenya Breweries Limited v Muriithi; Office of the Data Protection Commissioner (Interested Party)

Kenya Breweries Limited v Muriithi; Office of the Data Protection Commissioner (Interested Party) [2025] KEHC 9990 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E267 of 2025

Judge

AC Mrima

The court found that the preliminary objection did not raise pure points of law but required interrogation of evidence, and thus failed the test for a valid preliminary objection. On the application for enlargement of time, the court was satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal was occasioned by a system failure in the Judiciary e-filing portal, which was beyond the applicant's control, and that the delay of three days was not inordinate. The respondent did not demonstrate any prejudice that would be suffered if time was enlarged. Regarding the stay of execution, the court held that the…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Time
• Stay Of Execution
• Preliminary Objection
• Data Protection Enforcement
• Jurisdiction Of High Court