Kenya Case Law

Rayat Trading Co. Bank Limited v Bank of Baroda & another

Rayat Trading Co. Bank Limited v Bank of Baroda & another [2025] KEHC 10661 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Case 14 of 2011

Judge

F Gikonyo

The court found that the omission in the judgment regarding which party is liable to pay the Kshs. 22 million damages was an accidental slip or omission. The intention of the court, as evidenced by the judgment's reasoning, was that the 1st defendant, not the 2nd defendant, should bear liability for the damages. The slip rule under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act empowers the court to correct such omissions to give effect to its original intention, and this jurisdiction is not ousted by the doctrine of functus officio. The application did not seek a substantive review or alteration of t…

Source excerpt

• Slip Rule
• Rectification Of Judgment
• Clerical Error
• Liability For Damages

Chalo v Masyula & 3 others

Chalo v Masyula & 3 others [2025] KEELC 3814 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment and Land Appeal E006 of 2024

Judge

EK Wabwoto

First appeal dismissed after the Environment and Land Court upheld setting aside of an ex parte judgment for irregular service and rejected a slip rule amendment.

• Exparte Judgment
• Service Of Process
• Setting Aside Judgment
• Functus Officio
• Slip Rule
• Costs Award

Lochab Brothers Limited v Transport Workers Union

Lochab Brothers Limited v Transport Workers Union [2025] KECA 848 (KLR)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal (Application) 46 of 2020

Judges

MA Warsame, JM Mativo, PM Gachoka

The Court of Appeal dismissed an application to review its earlier judgment, holding that the alleged error was a substantive jurisdictional issue, not a slip rule mistake.

• Review Of Judgment
• Slip Rule
• Jurisdiction Of Court Of Appeal
• Procedural Timelines
• Finality Of Judgments
• Review-of-judgment

Horeria v Weru & another

Horeria v Weru & another [2025] KEELC 1485 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment & Land Case 756 of 2012

Judge

CA Ochieng

The court has the power under the Slip Rule (Sections 99 and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act) to correct the name of the 2nd Defendant in the judgment from 'Town Clerk Nairobi City Council' to 'Nairobi City County Government' because the latter is the legal successor of the former under the Constitution, and the amendment is necessary to give effect to the court's intention in the judgment.

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Slip Rule
• Successor Liability
• Execution Of Decree

Ngeno v Mosonik

Ngeno v Mosonik [2025] KEELC 1189 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment and Land Appeal E001 of 2022

Judge

LA Omollo

The Environment and Land Court dismissed an application seeking review of a costs order, finding no error apparent on the face of the record.

• Review Of Judgment
• Costs Award
• Error Apparent On Record
• Slip Rule
• Judicial Discretion
• Review-of-judgment

Jelimo v Kemboi & another

Jelimo v Kemboi & another [2025] KEELC 761 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment & Land Case 78 of 2008

Judge

CK Nzili

The court dismissed a post-judgment application to amend a land judgment and decree, holding the requested changes were substantive and outside the slip rule.

• Amendment Of Judgment
• Slip Rule
• Land Title Cancellation
• Inhibition Orders
• Fraudulent Transfer
• Pleadings And Parties

Kenya Vision 2030 Delivery Board v Commission on Administrative Justice & 2 others

Kenya Vision 2030 Delivery Board v Commission on Administrative Justice & 2 others [2024] KESC 67 (KLR)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

Petition (Application) 42 of 2019

Judges

PM Mwilu, MK Ibrahim, SC Wanjala, N Ndungu, I Lenaola

The Supreme Court held that its omission to address the issue of costs for the proceedings before the Court of Appeal in its earlier judgment constituted an error apparent on the face of the record, correctable under Section 21(4) of the Supreme Court Act (the slip rule). The Court found that, as the Appellant/Applicant was the successful party in the appeal, it was entitled to costs for the proceedings at the Court of Appeal. The Court clarified that, although the Court of Appeal had awarded costs to both the 1st and 3rd Respondents, there was no reason to exclude either from bearing the cos…

Source excerpt

• Costs Awards
• Slip Rule
• Appellate Review
• Judicial Discretion

In re RWW (Minor)

In re RWW (Minor) [2024] KEHC 10749 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E227 of 2021

Judge

RC Rutto

The High Court corrected its earlier judgment under the slip rule, amended the record to reflect filed submissions, and declined a refund order for Kshs. 560,000.

• Slip Rule
• Correction Of Judgment
• Child Maintenance Orders
• Arrears Refund
• Appeal Procedure
• Slip-rule

Trattoria Limited v Maina & 3 others

Trattoria Limited v Maina & 3 others [2024] KESC 54 (KLR)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

Petition (Application) 26 (E029) of 2022

Judges

MK Koome, MK Ibrahim, SC Wanjala, N Ndungu, W Ouko

The Supreme Court reviewed a prior ruling to correct an omission on costs, holding that the slip rule allowed correction of a clerical oversight without reopening the merits.

• Review Of Judgments
• Slip Rule
• Award Of Costs
• Court Discretion On Costs
• Slip-rule
• Review-of-judgments

Nyoike v Chief Land Registrar & 4 others

Nyoike v Chief Land Registrar & 4 others [2024] KEELC 6660 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment & Land Case E197 of 2023

Judge

MD Mwangi

The court corrected a typographical error in its earlier ruling, replacing “plaintiff” with “5th Defendant/Applicant” under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act.

• Slip Rule
• Correction Of Judgment
• Typographical Error
• Actual Occupation
• Clerical Mistake
• Slip-rule