[2020] KEHC 1232 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 1232 (KLR)

The Court found that while the Applicants sought leave to apply for judicial review orders to compel payment of a judgment sum, they failed to provide evidence of compliance with the Government Proceedings Act, specifically the issuance and service of a Certificate of Order Against the Government. This procedural...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 1232 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Afrison Export & Import Limited; Applicant: Huelands Limited; Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E057 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Orders
Outcome
Directions issued for service and further mention; no final determination on leave at this stage.
Judges
P Nyamweya
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Enforcement of Judgments, Leave to Apply, Government Proceedings, Certiorari, Mandamus
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Judicial Review Enforcement of Judgments Leave to Apply Government Proceedings Certiorari Mandamus

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Afrison Export & Import Limited

Applicant

Huelands Limited

Applicant

The Hon. Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Orders

  1. 1 Whether the Applicants have met the threshold for grant of leave to apply for judicial review orders of mandamus and certiorari against the Respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the Applicants have complied with the requirements of the Government Proceedings Act, specifically the issuance and service of a Certificate of Order Against the Government.
  3. 3 Whether the application discloses an arguable case fit for further consideration.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that while the Applicants sought leave to apply for judicial review orders to compel payment of a judgment sum, they failed to provide evidence of compliance with the Government Proceedings Act, specifically the issuance and service of a Certificate of Order Against the Government. This procedural requirement is mandatory for enforcement against the Government. As such, the Court determined that the Respondent and Interested Parties should be given an opportunity to respond to the application, and set directions for service and further mention. The matter was not dismissed outright but was set down for further procedural steps to ensure compliance and allow all parties to...

Court Disposition

Directions issued for service and further mention; no final determination on leave at this stage.

Orders

  • Applicants to serve the Respondent and Interested Parties with the Chamber Summons, skeletal submissions, a copy of the ruling, and a mention notice within 21 days.
  • Respondent and Interested Parties granted leave to file and serve responses and skeletal submissions within 21 days of service.