Scribd
Upload
245 views2 pages

Grounds for Civil Review of Judgments

The document outlines the provisions for seeking a review of judgments under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, detailing the grounds for review such as discovery of new evidence or apparent mistakes. It references case law that emphasizes the discretionary power of the court to grant reviews based on sufficient reasons, without limiting those reasons to the specified grounds. The document highlights the importance of timely applications for review and the broad interpretation of 'sufficient reason' in the context of judicial review.

Uploaded by

findingflowhub
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
245 views2 pages

Grounds for Civil Review of Judgments

The document outlines the provisions for seeking a review of judgments under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, detailing the grounds for review such as discovery of new evidence or apparent mistakes. It references case law that emphasizes the discretionary power of the court to grant reviews based on sufficient reasons, without limiting those reasons to the specified grounds. The document highlights the importance of timely applications for review and the broad interpretation of 'sufficient reason' in the context of judicial review.

Uploaded by

findingflowhub
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

REVIEW

1. Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 21 provides as follows:-


“Any person who considers himself aggrieved—
a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed by this Act, but from which
no appeal has been preferred; or
b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed by this Act, may apply for
a review of judgment to the court which passed the decree or made the order, and
the court may make such order thereon as it thinks fit.”
2. Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 provides as follows:-
“1. (1) Any person considering himself aggrieved—
a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed, but from which no appeal
has been preferred; or
b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is hereby allowed, and who from the
discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of
due diligence, was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him at
the time when the decree was passed or the order made, or on account of some
mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or for any other sufficient
reason, desires to obtain a review of the decree or order, may apply for a review
of judgment to the court which passed the decree or made the order without
unreasonable delay.”
3. In Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board & 2 others [2018]
eKLR it was held:-
“12. Section 80 gives the power of review and Order 45 sets out the rules. The rules
restrict the grounds for review. The rules lay down the jurisdiction and scope of
review limiting it to the following grounds;
(a) discovery of new and important matter or evidence which after the exercise of
due diligence, was not within the knowledge of the applicant or could not be
produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or the order made or;
(b) on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or
(c) for any other sufficient reason and whatever the ground there is a requirement
that the application has to be made without un reasonable delay.”
4. In Pancras T. Swai v Kenya Breweries Limited [2014] eKLR the Court of Appeal held:-
“Order 44 rule 1 (now Order 45 rule 1 in the 2010 Civil Procedure Rules) gave the
trial Court discretionary power to allow review on the three limps therein stated or
“for any sufficient reason.”… As repeatedly pointed out in various decisions of this
Court, the words, “for any sufficient reason” must be viewed in the context firstly of
Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21, which confers an unfettered right to
apply for review and secondly on the current jurisprudential thinking that the words
need not be analogous with the other grounds specified in the order.”

5. In Shanzu Investments Limited v. Commissioner for Lands (Civil Appeal No. 100 of
1993) the Court of appeal upheld its earlier decision in Wangechi Kimata & Another Vs.
Charan Singh (C.A. No. 80 of 1985) (unreported) where it was held:-
“Any other sufficient reason need not be analogous with the other grounds set out in the
rule because such restriction would be a clog on the unfettered right given to the Court
by Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act; and that the other grounds set out in the rule
did not in themselves form a genus or class of things which the third general head could
be said to be analogous.”

You might also like