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

Republic v Medical Practitioners & Dentists Board & Another & another; MIO1 on behalf of MIO2 (a Minor) & another (Interested Party); Kingángá (Exparte) (Miscellaneous Civil Application 59 & 63 of 2019 (Consolidated)) [2021] KEHC 298 (KLR) (Judicial Review) (16 November 2021) (Ruling)

[2021] KEHC 298 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
298
Citation
[2021] KEHC 298 (KLR)
Decided
16 November 2021
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureApplication for review of judgmentCoramChinnappa Reddy, F-G Vieyra, JM MATIVO
Holding

The court's jurisdiction to review its own judgment is limited and must be exercised within the framework of Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010.

Facts

The applicants, Dr. Sunil Vinayak and Dr. Sunil Vinayak trading as 'Smile Africa Dental Clinic', moved the court seeking to review their judgment rendered on 22nd July 2020, and set aside the decree and substitute it with an appropriate decree.

Issues

  1. Court's jurisdiction to review its own judgment
  2. Relevant provisions of the Medical Practitioners and Dentists Act and Health Laws (Amendment) Act, 2019

Reasoning

The court analyzed the provisions of Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, to determine the scope of the court's review. The court concluded that the application for review must be made without unreasonable delay and for grounds such as discovery of new and important matter or evidence, or a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record.

Outcome

The court dismissed the application for review.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Act
  • Health Laws (Amendment) Act, 2019
Cases cited (2)
  • Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
  • 80. Any person who considers himself aggrieved...
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 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case