[2014] KEHC 5162 (KLR)
The court found that the Applicant had established a prima facie case that the Respondent's directive barring private vehicles from having tinted windows may have been issued without legal authority and could amount to an unlawful amendment of the Traffic Rules. Given the challenge to the Respondent's powers and the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 5162 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Akitch Okola; Respondent: The Inspect General of Police Francis Kimaiyo
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 183 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Leave and Stay Application
- Outcome
- Leave granted for judicial review; leave to operate as stay of directive for private vehicles only.
- Judges
- GV Odunga
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Ultra Vires Actions, Traffic Regulation, Interim Stay Orders
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Akitch Okola
Applicant
The Inspect General of Police Francis Kimaiyo
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Leave and Stay Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Respondent had the legal authority to issue a directive barring private vehicles from having tinted windows.
- 2 Whether the directive amounted to an unlawful amendment of the Traffic Rules.
- 3 Whether leave for judicial review should be granted and if such leave should operate as a stay of the directive.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Applicant had established a prima facie case that the Respondent's directive barring private vehicles from having tinted windows may have been issued without legal authority and could amount to an unlawful amendment of the Traffic Rules. Given the challenge to the Respondent's powers and the allegation that the directive is being used to harass motorists, the court determined that leave for judicial review should be granted. Furthermore, the court held that the grant of leave should operate as a stay of the directive, but only in relation to private vehicles, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive Motion or until further orders. The stay does not...
Court Disposition
Leave granted for judicial review; leave to operate as stay of directive for private vehicles only.
Orders
- Leave granted in terms of prayers 2(a) and 2(b) of the Chambers Summons dated 16th May 2014.
- Substantive Motion to be filed and served within 3 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND CONSTITUTIONAL DIVISION
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 183 OF 2014
IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 8 & 9OF THE LAW REFORM ACT CAP 26
AND
IN THE MATTER OF ORDER 53 OF THE CIVIL PROCEURE RULES, 2010
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THE TRAFFIC ACT, CAP 403 OF THE LAW OF KENYA
AND
IN THE MATTTER OF THE TRAFFIC RULES, 1953
BETWEEN
AKITCH OKOLA....................................................................................APPLICANT
AND
THE INSPECT GENERAL OF POLICE FRANCIS KIMAIYO……..RESPONDENT
RULING
I have listened to learned counsel for the Applicant and I have perused the application dated 16th May 2014.
The Applicant alleges that the decision by the Respondent to bar private vehicles from having tinted windows is not supported by the law and hence amounts to an amendment of the Traffic Rules, a power which the Respondent does not have.
That issue in my view establishes a prima facie case which warrants the grant of leave sought.
Accordingly, I grant leave in terms of prayers 2(a) and 2(b) of the Chambers Summons dated 16th May 2014 and direct that the substantive Motion be filed and served within 3 days.
The applicant also seeks a direction that the grant of leave, do operate as a stay of the said directive. Whereas the Respondent may well show at the hearing that the said directive is well intended the fact that his powers to issue the same are under challenge ought to be investigated. Since it is contended that so far the said directive is only being used to harass motorists, I am satisfied that the same ought to be stayed for the limited period of hearing and determining the Notice of Motion.
Accordingly I direct that the grant of leave shall operate as a stay of the said directive pending the hearing and determination of the substantive Motion or until further orders of the Court.
However as it is admitted that the said directive is only unlawful in so far as it relates to private vehicles, this order will not apply to public service vehicles.
Directions on 29th May, 2014. Costs in the cause.
Dated at Nairobi this 20th day of May 2014
G V ODUNGA
JUDGE
Delivered in the presence of:
Mr Change for the Applicant
Cc Kevin