[2015] KEHC 2568 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 2568 (KLR)

The court found that the exclusion of the petitioners from the respondent school constituted a violation of their constitutional right to education under Article 43(1)(f) and their rights as children under Article 53(2) of the Constitution. The court held that the best interests of the child must be the primary...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 2568 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: E.K. (A child suing through his Father and next friend E.K.K.); Applicant: C.S.C. (A child suing through his Mother and next friend E.M.S.); Applicant: E.E.K. (A child suing through his Mother and next friend R.P.); Applicant: M.L. (A child suing through his Mother and next friend N.C.T.); Applicant: L.K.C. (A child suing through his Mother and next friend R.K.); Applicant: A.M. (A child suing through his Mother and next friend R.P.); Respondent: The Registered Trustees of S.H.S.
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Constitutional Petition 18 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment (extempore)
Outcome
petition allowed in part
Judges
A Mshila
Legal Topics
Right to Education, Children's Rights, School Admission, Constitutional Remedies
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Family and Children Right to Education Children's Rights School Admission Constitutional Remedies

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E.K. (A child suing through his Father and next friend E.K.K.)

Applicant

C.S.C. (A child suing through his Mother and next friend E.M.S.)

Applicant

E.E.K. (A child suing through his Mother and next friend R.P.)

Applicant

M.L. (A child suing through his Mother and next friend N.C.T.)

Applicant

L.K.C. (A child suing through his Mother and next friend R.K.)

Applicant

A.M. (A child suing through his Mother and next friend R.P.)

Applicant

The Registered Trustees of S.H.S.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment (extempore)

  1. 1 Whether the petitioners' constitutional right to education under Article 43(f) was violated by their exclusion from the respondent school.
  2. 2 Whether the petitioners' rights as children under Article 53(2) of the Constitution were infringed.
  3. 3 Whether the petitioners are entitled to re-admission and/or compensation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the exclusion of the petitioners from the respondent school constituted a violation of their constitutional right to education under Article 43(1)(f) and their rights as children under Article 53(2) of the Constitution. The court held that the best interests of the child must be the primary consideration in all actions concerning children, including decisions regarding school admission and exclusion. The court determined that the petitioners were entitled to immediate re-admission to the respondent school, except for the fifth petitioner who had already been enrolled and registered for exams elsewhere, and thus was entitled to compensation for the disruption. The...

Court Disposition

petition allowed in part

Orders

  • Declaration granted in terms of prayer (1) of the petition.
  • Petitioners Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 are to be re-admitted to the respondent school forthwith.