[2025] KEHC 4172 (KLR)
The court found that although the applicant delayed until the last permissible day to file the application, the matter was time-bound under the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act. The court exercised its discretion to grant leave to apply for judicial review orders of certiorari and prohibition, as sought by...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 4172 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Eaa Company Limited; Respondent: Charles Nzai; Respondent: Public Procurement Regulatory Authority; Respondent: Public Procurement Regulatory Board
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review Application E080 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Leave Application
- Outcome
- Leave to apply for judicial review granted; leave to operate as stay of debarment decision; directions for expedited hearing issued.
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Public Procurement, Leave to Apply, Stay of Implementation
- 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
Eaa Company Limited
Applicant
Charles Nzai
Respondent
Public Procurement Regulatory Authority
Respondent
Public Procurement Regulatory Board
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Leave Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to leave to apply for judicial review orders of certiorari and prohibition against the respondents' decision to debar it.
- 2 Whether the leave granted should operate as a stay of the implementation of the debarment decision pending hearing and determination of the substantive motion.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the applicant delayed until the last permissible day to file the application, the matter was time-bound under the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act. The court exercised its discretion to grant leave to apply for judicial review orders of certiorari and prohibition, as sought by the applicant, noting that the merits of the applicant's allegations would be determined at the substantive hearing. Furthermore, the court ordered that the leave granted would operate as a stay of the implementation of the debarment decision made on 18/3/2025, thereby preserving the status quo pending the hearing and determination of the substantive motion. The court issued...
Court Disposition
Leave to apply for judicial review granted; leave to operate as stay of debarment decision; directions for expedited hearing issued.
Orders
- Leave is granted to the applicant to apply for orders of certiorari and prohibition as per prayers 2(a) and (b) of the Notice of Motion dated 26/3/2025.
- The leave so granted shall operate as a stay of implementation of the decision to debar the applicant made on 18/3/2025 in Debarment Application No. 9/2024.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
Eaa Company Limited v Nzai & 2 others (Judicial Review Application E080 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 4172 (KLR) (Judicial Review) (2 April 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 4172 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Judicial Review
Judicial Review Application E080 of 2025
RE Aburili, J
April 2, 2025
Between
Eaa Company Limited
Applicant
and
Charles Nzai
1st Respondent
Public Procurement Regulatory Authority
2nd Respondent
Public Procurement Regulatory Board
3rd Respondent
Ruling
1. I have considered the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review orders of certiorari & Prohibition, dated 26/3/2025, as filed under certificate of urgency.
2. I do not certify it as urgent, noting that the decision sought to be challenged was made on 18/3/2025 and the applicant waited until the 14th day, which was the last day, to file the application.
3. However, as the proceedings being challenged are under the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act and are time bound, I shall proceed to consider the application on its merits, exparte, under Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
4. In the application for leave to apply, the applicant claims that the decision by the Respondents to debar the applicant was made oblivious of the fact that when the applicant was debarred initially, it got a stay of implementation of the debarment and that it therefore bid during the stay period.
5. The merits of those allegations will be tested during the merit hearing of the substantive motion if filed.
6. Accordingly, I grant the leave sought to apply as per prayers 2(a) and (b) of the Notice of Motion, (though this should have been a chamber summons) dated 26/3/2025.
7. I further order that the leave so granted shall operate as stay of implementation of the decision to debar the applicant made on 18/3/2025 in Debarment Application No. 9/2024.
8. The substantive motion to be filed and served within 2 days of this order being uploaded on the CTS and a notification via email send to the applicant’s Counsel upon which the Respondents shall file and serve their responses to the Notice of Motion within 5 days of the date of service.
9. The Applicant shall then have 3 days of date of service to file and serve a further affidavit, if need be together with brief written submissions to canvass the application.
10. The Respondents too, shall have 3 days of the date of service to file and serve (if need be) a supplementary affidavit together with brief written submissions.
11. The matter shall be mentioned for purposes of fixing a judgment date on 28/4/2025 in the substantive motion to be filed in a separate file by close of business on 4/4/2025.
12. This file is closed.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025R.E. ABURILIJUDGE