https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8569
The court held that the dispute over the alleged alteration of the Applicant’s marks had already been determined by the Legal Education Appeals Tribunal, and that section 38(1) of the Legal Education Act required the Applicant to pursue an appeal rather than judicial review; therefore the Applicant had no basis for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 8569 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Erick Motari Onguti; Respondent: Council of Legal Education
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review E192 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Leave Application Dismissed
- Outcome
- Application dismissed.
- Judges
- ["NM Orina"]
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Appeal Versus Judicial Review, Abuse of Court Process, Legal Education Appeals Tribunal, Challenge to Marks Alteration
- 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
Erick Motari Onguti
Applicant
Council of Legal Education
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Leave Application Dismissed
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Applicant established a basis for leave to apply for judicial review.
- 2 Whether the matter was barred because it had already been determined by the Legal Education Appeals Tribunal.
- 3 Whether the proper recourse was an appeal under section 38(1) of the Legal Education Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the dispute over the alleged alteration of the Applicant’s marks had already been determined by the Legal Education Appeals Tribunal, and that section 38(1) of the Legal Education Act required the Applicant to pursue an appeal rather than judicial review; therefore the Applicant had no basis for leave and the application was an abuse of process.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed.
Orders
- The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Onguti v Council of Legal Education (Judicial Review E192 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 8569 (KLR) (Judicial Review) (18 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 8569 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts) Judicial Review Judicial Review E192 of 2026 NM Orina, J June 18, 2026 Between Erick Motari Onguti Applicant and Council of Legal Education Respondent Ruling 1.I have considered the certificate of urgency, the ex parte chamber summons, the statutory statement and the verifying affidavit, all dated 15 June 2026, together with the annextures. The Applicant acknowledges that he unsuccessfully pursued this claim before the Legal Education Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal). This court has established that the matter in dispute being the alleged revision or alteration of the ex parte Applicant’s marks for ATP 108 – Commercial Transactions – from 58 to 48 was the subject of Legal Education Appeal No. E027 of 2023 where the Tribunal rendered a determination dismissing the Applicant’s claim. (See, Ong’uti v Council for Legal Education; Kenya School of Law (Interested Party) [2023] KELEAT 648 (KLR)). 2.Pursuant to Section 38(1) of the Legal Education Act, the proper recourse was for the Applicant to prefer an appeal against the decision of the Tribunal. Consequently, this court is not satisfied that the Applicant has established basis for grant of leave to apply for judicial review. The application is an abuse of the court process and the same is hereby dismissed. DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2026NABIL M. ORINAJUDGE