1. This Court delivered a judgment on 28th April 2023 in respect of the appeal filed by the appellant against the lower court's decision in respect of the applications dated 6th December and December 2021.
2. Upon delivery of its ruling, this Court became functus officio in respect of the matters in dispute on appeal.
3. The scope of the principle of functus officio was explained in great detail by the Court of Appeal in the case of Telkom Kenya Limited v John Ochanda (Suing on His Own Behalf and on Behalf of 996 Former Employees of Telkom Kenya Limited [2014] eKLR. The court stated that:
“Functus officio is an enduring principle of law that prevents the re-opening of a matter before a court that rendered the final decision thereon. It is a doctrine that has been recognized in the common law tradition from as long ago as the latter part of the 19th Century. In the Canadian case of Chandler v Alberta Association of Architects [1989] 2 SCR 848, Sopinka J. traced the origins of the doctrines as follows (at p 860);“The general rule that a final decision of a court cannot be re-opened derives from the decision of the English Court of Appeal in re St Nazaire Co, (1879), 12 Ch D 88. The basis for it was that the power to rehear was transferred by the Judicature Acts to the appellate division. The rule applied only after the formal judgment had been drawn up, issued and entered, and was subject to two exceptions:1. Where there had been a slip drawing it up, and,2. Where there was an error in expressing the manifest intention of the court. See Paper Machinery Ltd v JO Rose Engineering Corp [1934] SCR 186”The Supreme Court in Raila Odinga v IEBC cited with approval an excerpt from an article by Daniel Malan Pretorius entitled, “The Origins of the Functus Officio Doctrine, with Special reference to its Application in Administrative Law “(2005) 122 SALJ 832, in which the learned author stated,… “The functus officio doctrine is one of the mechanisms by means of which the law gives expression to the principle in finality. According to this doctrine, a person who is vested with adjunctive or decision-making powers may, as a general rule, exercise those powers only once in relation to the same matter … The principle is that once such a decision has been given, it is (subject to any right of appeal to a superior body or functionary) final and conclusive. Such a decision cannot be reviewed or varied by the decision maker. ”The doctrine is not to be understood to bar any engagement by a court with a case that it has already decided or pronounced itself on. What it does bar is a merit-based decisional re-engagement with the case once final judgment has been entered, and a decree thereon issued. There do therefore exist certain exceptions, and these have been captured thus in Jersey Evening Post Ltd vs Ai Thani [2002] JLR 542 at 550, also cited and applied by the Supreme Court;“ A court is functus when it has performed all its duties in a particular case. The doctrine does not prevent the court from correcting clerical errors, nor does it prevent a judicial change of mind even when a decision has been communicated to the parties. Proceedings are only concluded, and the court is functus, when its judgment or order has been perfected. The purpose of the doctrine is to provide finality. Once proceedings are finally concluded, the court cannot review or alter its decision; any challenge to its ruling or adjunction must be taken to a higher court if that right is available.”
4. The Court’s ruling was in respect of a particular impugned decision, not the entire proceedings in the lower Court. Where, as now, the appellant is aggrieved by the subsequent proceedings in the lower Court, he has the option of filing an appeal. That is what he should have done.
5. Having become functus officio, the Court cannot consider the Notice of Motion application dated 17th February 2026. The application is therefore without merit, frivolous and vexatious, and an abuse of the process of the Court.
6. Under the circumstances, I dismiss the application with costs.
7. It is so ordered.
Dated and signed in Nairobi this 21st day of April 2026. Delivered virtually through Microsoft TEAMS.
2. Upon delivery of its ruling, this Court became functus officio in respect of the matters in dispute on appeal.
3. The scope of the principle of functus officio was explained in great detail by the Court of Appeal in the case of Telkom Kenya Limited v John Ochanda (Suing on His Own Behalf and on Behalf of 996 Former Employees of Telkom Kenya Limited [2014] eKLR. The court stated that:
“Functus officio is an enduring principle of law that prevents the re-opening of a matter before a court that rendered the final decision thereon. It is a doctrine that has been recognized in the common law tradition from as long ago as the latter part of the 19th Century. In the Canadian case of Chandler v Alberta Association of Architects [1989] 2 SCR 848, Sopinka J. traced the origins of the doctrines as follows (at p 860);“The general rule that a final decision of a court cannot be re-opened derives from the decision of the English Court of Appeal in re St Nazaire Co, (1879), 12 Ch D 88. The basis for it was that the power to rehear was transferred by the Judicature Acts to the appellate division. The rule applied only after the formal judgment had been drawn up, issued and entered, and was subject to two exceptions:1. Where there had been a slip drawing it up, and,2. Where there was an error in expressing the manifest intention of the court. See Paper Machinery Ltd v JO Rose Engineering Corp [1934] SCR 186”The Supreme Court in Raila Odinga v IEBC cited with approval an excerpt from an article by Daniel Malan Pretorius entitled, “The Origins of the Functus Officio Doctrine, with Special reference to its Application in Administrative Law “(2005) 122 SALJ 832, in which the learned author stated,… “The functus officio doctrine is one of the mechanisms by means of which the law gives expression to the principle in finality. According to this doctrine, a person who is vested with adjunctive or decision-making powers may, as a general rule, exercise those powers only once in relation to the same matter … The principle is that once such a decision has been given, it is (subject to any right of appeal to a superior body or functionary) final and conclusive. Such a decision cannot be reviewed or varied by the decision maker. ”The doctrine is not to be understood to bar any engagement by a court with a case that it has already decided or pronounced itself on. What it does bar is a merit-based decisional re-engagement with the case once final judgment has been entered, and a decree thereon issued. There do therefore exist certain exceptions, and these have been captured thus in Jersey Evening Post Ltd vs Ai Thani [2002] JLR 542 at 550, also cited and applied by the Supreme Court;“ A court is functus when it has performed all its duties in a particular case. The doctrine does not prevent the court from correcting clerical errors, nor does it prevent a judicial change of mind even when a decision has been communicated to the parties. Proceedings are only concluded, and the court is functus, when its judgment or order has been perfected. The purpose of the doctrine is to provide finality. Once proceedings are finally concluded, the court cannot review or alter its decision; any challenge to its ruling or adjunction must be taken to a higher court if that right is available.”
4. The Court’s ruling was in respect of a particular impugned decision, not the entire proceedings in the lower Court. Where, as now, the appellant is aggrieved by the subsequent proceedings in the lower Court, he has the option of filing an appeal. That is what he should have done.
5. Having become functus officio, the Court cannot consider the Notice of Motion application dated 17th February 2026. The application is therefore without merit, frivolous and vexatious, and an abuse of the process of the Court.
6. Under the circumstances, I dismiss the application with costs.
7. It is so ordered.
Dated and signed in Nairobi this 21st day of April 2026. Delivered virtually through Microsoft TEAMS.