[2025] KEHC 5863 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 5863 (KLR)

The court found that although the application for leave to apply for judicial review was filed on the last permissible day and thus not expeditiously, it was nonetheless within the statutory period. The application was not frivolous on its face, and the right to be heard under Article 50(1) of the Constitution...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 5863 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Hounslow Security Services Limited; Respondent: Public Procurement Administrative Review Board; Respondent: Kenya Forestry Research Institute; Interested Party: Papaton Security Services Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review Application E120 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Leave and Stay Application
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review granted; leave to operate as stay of enforcement of impugned procurement decisions; no order as to costs.
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Public Procurement Challenge, Leave to Apply, Stay of Proceedings
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Public Procurement Challenge Leave to Apply Stay of Proceedings

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hounslow Security Services Limited

Applicant

Public Procurement Administrative Review Board

Respondent

Kenya Forestry Research Institute

Respondent

Papaton Security Services Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Leave and Stay Application

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to apply for judicial review against the decisions of the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board.
  2. 2 Whether the leave granted should operate as a stay of enforcement of the impugned procurement decisions.
  3. 3 Whether the application was filed expeditiously and if urgency should be certified.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the application for leave to apply for judicial review was filed on the last permissible day and thus not expeditiously, it was nonetheless within the statutory period. The application was not frivolous on its face, and the right to be heard under Article 50(1) of the Constitution warranted granting leave. Given the incomplete procurement process and the need to preserve the status quo, the court exercised its discretion to order that the leave granted would operate as a stay of enforcement of the impugned decisions, including the signing and awarding of the tender in question, until the substantive motion is heard and determined. The court declined to...

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review granted; leave to operate as stay of enforcement of impugned procurement decisions; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the applicant to file the substantive judicial review application.
  • The leave so granted shall operate as a stay of enforcement of the decisions dated 24/4/2025 and 29/4/2025 made by the Respondent, including signing and awarding of tender No. KEFRI-ONT-006-2024-2025 to Papaton Security Services Limited.