[2006] KEHC 64 (KLR)

[2006] KEHC 64 (KLR)

The court held that the application for leave to apply for certiorari was filed after the expiry of the six-month period prescribed by Order 53 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The rule is mandatory, and non-compliance is fatal to the application. Since the award sought to be quashed was made almost eight months...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] KEHC 64 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joseph Getama Roswe; Respondent: Ntimaru Division Land Disputes Tribunal; Respondent: Kehancha Resident Magistrate’s Court
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisii
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 15 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (certiorari and Prohibition)
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Certiorari, Prohibition, Limitation Periods, Tribunal Awards
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Judicial Review Certiorari Prohibition Limitation Periods Tribunal Awards

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Getama Roswe

Applicant

Ntimaru Division Land Disputes Tribunal

Respondent

Kehancha Resident Magistrate’s Court

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (certiorari and Prohibition)

  1. 1 Whether leave can be granted to apply for certiorari to quash the tribunal's decision made more than six months prior.
  2. 2 Whether an order of prohibition can issue when leave for certiorari is denied due to lapse of time.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application for leave to apply for certiorari was filed after the expiry of the six-month period prescribed by Order 53 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The rule is mandatory, and non-compliance is fatal to the application. Since the award sought to be quashed was made almost eight months prior to the application, the court could not grant leave. Furthermore, since leave for certiorari was denied, it was not logical to issue an order of prohibition. The application was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.