[2022] KECA 623 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal found that the High Court erred in quashing the Dispute Resolution Committee's decision and issuing a writ of mandamus against the IEBC. The appellate court held that the Committee acted within its mandate and that the High Court's intervention was not justified. The petition before the High...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KECA 623 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Loice Akoth Kawaka; Appellant: Roseline Akoth Awino; Respondent: Oscar Oluoch Ouma; Respondent: Orange Democratic Party; Respondent: Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission; Respondent: Returning Officer Ndhiwa Constituency
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal E168 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal_allowed
- Judges
- PO Kiage, HA Omondi, F Tuiyott
- Legal Topics
- Electoral Dispute Resolution, Mandamus Orders, Party Nomination Process
- 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
Loice Akoth Kawaka
Appellant
Roseline Akoth Awino
Appellant
Oscar Oluoch Ouma
Respondent
Orange Democratic Party
Respondent
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
Respondent
Returning Officer Ndhiwa Constituency
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court erred in quashing the decision of the 3rd Respondent’s Dispute Resolution Committee.
- 2 Whether the writ of mandamus was properly issued against the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission.
- 3 Whether the petition before the High Court was meritorious.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal found that the High Court erred in quashing the Dispute Resolution Committee's decision and issuing a writ of mandamus against the IEBC. The appellate court held that the Committee acted within its mandate and that the High Court's intervention was not justified. The petition before the High Court lacked merit, and the orders granted were set aside. The appeal was allowed, the High Court's judgment and decree were set aside, and the petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Court Disposition
appeal_allowed
Orders
- The appeal is allowed.
- The High Court's judgment and decree dated 6th July, 2022 are set aside in entirety.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
Kawaka & another v Ouma & 3 others (Civil Appeal E168 of 2022) [2022] KECA 623 (KLR) (14 July 2022) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2022] KECA 623 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Court of Appeal at Kisumu
Civil Appeal E168 of 2022
PO Kiage, HA Omondi & F Tuiyott, JJA
July 14, 2022
Between
Loice Akoth Kawaka
1st Appellant
Roseline Akoth Awino
2nd Appellant
and
Oscar Oluoch Ouma
1st Respondent
Orange Democratic Party
2nd Respondent
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
3rd Respondent
Returning Officer Ndhiwa Constituency
4th Respondent
(An Appeal from the Judgment and Orders of the High Court of Kenya at Homa Bay (Waweru Kiarie, J.) Dated 6th July, 2022 in Petition No. 1 of 2022 Constitutional Petition 1 of 2022 )
Judgment
1We have carefully considered the memorandum of appeal, the record of appeal, the written submissions and authorities filed by the parties herein.
2We have also paid careful attention and given due consideration to the oral arguments made by learned counsel who appeared before us, namely; Mr. Ochiel Dudley for the appellants and Mr. Muganda for the 3rd and 4th respondents, who also support the appeal, as well as Mr. Duncan Okatch for the 1st respondent and Ms. Masaai, for the 2nd respondent who are opposed to it.
3Our decision on the appeal is that the learned Kiarie J, erred in allowing with costs the petition that was before him, quashing the decision of the 3rd Respondent’s Dispute Resolution Committee made on 17th June, 2022 and issuing a writ mandamus against the 3rd Respondent.
4We accordingly allow this appeal and set aside in entirety the learned Judge’s judgment and decree dated 6th July, 2022. We substitute therefor an order dismissing the petition, but with no order as to costs. The parties herein shall bear own costs of this appeal.
5This decision is rendered pursuant to Rule 34 (7) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022, the reasons wherefor shall be given on 29thJuly, 2022.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 14THDAY OF JULY, 2022. P.O. KIAGE...............................JUDGE OF APPEALH. OMONDI...............................JUDGE OF APPEALF. TUIYOTT...............................JUDGE OF APPEAL.I certify that this is a true copy of the original.SIGNEDDEPUTY REGISTRAR.