[2017] KEHC 4836 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 4836 (KLR)

The court declined to grant interim injunctive orders, finding that without a full hearing it could not determine the legality of the closure notices or the threatened legal action against the petitioners. The court held that the principles for granting interim injunctions, as set out in Giella v Cassman Brown, were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEHC 4836 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Eunice Njambi Odera t/a Vision Budget Pub & Budget Pup; Applicant: Esther Muthoni Manoah t/a Highway Bar; Applicant: Leah Wambui Kamau t/a Lewaka Bar; Applicant: Simon Munene Ndungu t/a Lakers Pub; Respondent: County Government of Nakuru; Respondent: The Attorney General; Respondent: The Inspector General; Respondent: National Police Service; Respondent: The Cabinet Secretary Ministry of Interior & Coordination of National Government
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 4 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Application for Interim Injunctive Orders
Outcome
Interim injunctive orders declined; application to be set down for inter partes hearing.
Judges
CC Kipkorir
Legal Topics
Right to Fair Administrative Action, Licensing of Businesses, Interim Injunctions, Regulation of Alcohol, Public Interest, Abuse of Process
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Right to Fair Administrative Action Licensing of Businesses Interim Injunctions Regulation of Alcohol Public Interest Abuse of Process

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eunice Njambi Odera t/a Vision Budget Pub & Budget Pup

Applicant

Esther Muthoni Manoah t/a Highway Bar

Applicant

Leah Wambui Kamau t/a Lewaka Bar

Applicant

Simon Munene Ndungu t/a Lakers Pub

Applicant

County Government of Nakuru

Respondent

The Attorney General

Respondent

The Inspector General

Respondent

National Police Service

Respondent

The Cabinet Secretary Ministry of Interior & Coordination of National Government

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Application for Interim Injunctive Orders

  1. 1 Whether the petitioners are entitled to interim injunctive orders restraining the respondents from interfering with their bar businesses pending hearing and determination of the application.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents can be compelled by mandatory injunction to issue annual licences to the petitioners.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents' actions in refusing to issue licences and threatening closure constitute abuse of process or breach of rights.

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to grant interim injunctive orders, finding that without a full hearing it could not determine the legality of the closure notices or the threatened legal action against the petitioners. The court held that the principles for granting interim injunctions, as set out in Giella v Cassman Brown, were not satisfied at this interlocutory stage. The gazette notice appointing a task force on illicit brews was deemed irrelevant to the immediate application, as it only outlined the task force's mandate to make recommendations. The court directed that the application be set down for inter partes hearing on a priority basis, emphasizing that the issues raised required substantive...

Court Disposition

Interim injunctive orders declined; application to be set down for inter partes hearing.

Orders

  • No interim orders granted at this stage.
  • Application to be set down for inter partes hearing on a priority basis.