[2025] KEHC 3455 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 3455 (KLR)

The court held that the application for contempt of court was improperly filed as a new and independent proceeding rather than within the original mandamus proceedings (JR E146/2023) from which the alleged contempt arose. The proper procedure requires that any contempt application be brought within the same file as...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 3455 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Illuminator Limited; Respondent: County Secretary, Nairobi City County; Respondent: Chief Officer, Finance/County Treasurer Nairobi City County; Respondent: County Executive Committee Member, Finance and Economic Affairs Nairobi City County
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review Application E099 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/striking Out
Outcome
application struck out; file closed; no order as to costs
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Mandamus Orders, Enforcement of Judgments
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Mandamus Orders Enforcement of Judgments

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Illuminator Limited

Applicant

County Secretary, Nairobi City County

Respondent

Chief Officer, Finance/County Treasurer Nairobi City County

Respondent

County Executive Committee Member, Finance and Economic Affairs Nairobi City County

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/striking Out

  1. 1 Whether the application for contempt of court was properly filed as an independent proceeding rather than within the original mandamus proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the court should entertain the contempt application in a separate file.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application for contempt of court was improperly filed as a new and independent proceeding rather than within the original mandamus proceedings (JR E146/2023) from which the alleged contempt arose. The proper procedure requires that any contempt application be brought within the same file as the substantive order allegedly disobeyed. As such, the Notice of Motion dated 14/8/2024 was struck out and the file closed, with directions that the applicant may file the appropriate application in the correct proceedings. No orders as to costs were made.

Court Disposition

application struck out; file closed; no order as to costs

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 14/8/2024 is struck out.
  • The file is closed.