SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

James Kariuki v Simon Gitahi Kariuki & 3 others [2020] KECPT 100 (KLR)

[2020] KECPT 100 (KLR) Co-operative Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Co-operative Tribunal
Case number
100
Citation
[2020] KECPT 100 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPostureAppeal from a decision of the Co-operative TribunalCoramNancy Wanjira Wnung
Holding

The Tribunal has jurisdiction to review the Judgment and Orders if the 1st and 3rd Respondents can prove discovery of new and important matter, a mistake or error on the face of the record, or other sufficient reasons.

Facts

The 1st and 3rd Respondents moved the Tribunal seeking to review and set aside a Judgment and Orders issued on 19/9/2017, alleging discovery of new and important matter.

Issues

  1. Whether the 1st and 3rd Respondents have a proper basis to warrant the Tribunal to review the Judgment
  2. Who should meet the costs of the Application

Reasoning

The Court interpreted Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules, stating that a court can only review its order if there is discovery of new and important matter, a mistake or error on the face of the record, or other sufficient reasons.

Outcome

The Tribunal has jurisdiction to review the Judgment and Orders if the 1st and 3rd Respondents can prove the required conditions.

Orders

  • The Tribunal will consider the Application and determine the issues raised by the Application

Remedies

  • The 1st and 3rd Respondents may seek to review, vary, or set aside the Judgment and Orders if they can prove the required conditions

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21), Laws of Kenya
  • Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Cases cited (1)
  • Francis Njoroge –vs- Stephen Maina Kanure [2018] eKLR
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case