REPUBLIC OF KENYA - The Judiciary

three-judge bench of the Court of Appeal, that was presided over by a
judge who wrote the majority decision and who stood accused of being
significantly a party to the case. The decision of the Court so constituted
was, therefore, indelibly tainted. One uncontroverted fact is
that the said judge of appeal resigned under a cloud of injustice, occasioned
by these allegations.
[106] On bringing these allegations to the Court of Appeal and asking
for a review of the decision, the Court refused to pay regard to these
facts, and dismissed the review application, stating that it had no jurisdiction.
Justice Omolo, writing for the majority, relied on the old maxim
that there ought to and must be an end to litigation, and stated:
“Yes, a party may be able to show that a decision is
wrong either in law or upon some clear reason. But
for the interest of peace, in the interest of certainty
and security, such a party might [be] and is often
told: Even if all that you say is correct, yet the decision
has been made and you must learn to live with
it.”
That Court stated that it did not need to concern itself with the underlying
dispute in the appeal, the conditions under which the appeal was
dismissed, or the affidavits that outlined the misconduct of both the
presiding judge and the respondents’ lawyer, because the respondents
had filed a notice of preliminary objection as to jurisdiction and
60