[2025] KEHC 805 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 805 (KLR)

The court allowed the applicant's oral request to withdraw the amended Notice of Motion, holding that each party should bear their own costs. The court found that, following withdrawal, there were no subsisting proceedings upon which a stay order could be anchored. The court further clarified that the Fair...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 805 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Billy Amendi Amugune; Respondent: Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal; Respondent: Chief Officer, Finance Nairobi County Government
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review E220 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Withdrawal of Application
Outcome
Application withdrawn; file closed.
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Judicial Review Procedure, Withdrawal of Application, Fair Administrative Action Act, Costs Orders
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Judicial Review Procedure Withdrawal of Application Fair Administrative Action Act Costs Orders

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Billy Amendi Amugune

Applicant

Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal

Respondent

Chief Officer, Finance Nairobi County Government

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Withdrawal of Application

  1. 1 Whether the Notice of Motion as amended should be withdrawn with or without costs.
  2. 2 Whether there are subsisting proceedings to anchor a stay order.
  3. 3 Whether leave of court is necessary for further proceedings under the Fair Administrative Action Act and Rules after withdrawal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court allowed the applicant's oral request to withdraw the amended Notice of Motion, holding that each party should bear their own costs. The court found that, following withdrawal, there were no subsisting proceedings upon which a stay order could be anchored. The court further clarified that the Fair Administrative Action Act and Rules provide the appropriate procedure for instituting fresh proceedings, and that no leave of court is required in the context of withdrawn proceedings. The applicant retains the liberty to approach the court afresh in accordance with the law and Article 50(1) of the Constitution. The file was accordingly closed.

Court Disposition

Application withdrawn; file closed.

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion as amended dated 29/1/2025 is marked as wholly withdrawn.
  • Each party to bear their own costs of the application.