[2019] KEELRC 978 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 978 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants had demonstrated sufficient grounds to warrant the grant of leave to commence judicial review proceedings. However, the court declined to have the leave operate as a stay, considering that some applicants had already been reinstated and the positions were in the process of being...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELRC 978 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Medical Practitioners, Pharmacists and Dentists Union and Others; Respondent: The County Government of Laikipia; Respondent: Laikipia County Public Service Board; Interested Party: Public Service Commission
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review 9 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Leave Application and Interim Orders
Outcome
Leave to commence judicial review granted; order of status quo issued; leave does not operate as stay; directions for further proceedings given.
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Judicial Review Procedure, Public Service Employment, Interim Relief, Leave to Commence Proceedings
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Judicial Review Procedure Public Service Employment Interim Relief Leave to Commence 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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Medical Practitioners, Pharmacists and Dentists Union and Others

Applicant

The County Government of Laikipia

Respondent

Laikipia County Public Service Board

Respondent

Public Service Commission

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Leave Application and Interim Orders

  1. 1 Whether leave to commence judicial review proceedings should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether leave should operate as a stay of the respondents' actions.
  3. 3 Whether an order of status quo should be issued pending determination of the substantive motion.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had demonstrated sufficient grounds to warrant the grant of leave to commence judicial review proceedings. However, the court declined to have the leave operate as a stay, considering that some applicants had already been reinstated and the positions were in the process of being filled. Instead, the court issued an order of status quo to apply to the applicants pending the hearing and determination of the intended judicial review. The applicants were directed to file the substantive motion within 21 days, failing which the leave and conservatory order would lapse. The respondents were granted 21 days to reply upon service, and directions were scheduled...

Court Disposition

Leave to commence judicial review granted; order of status quo issued; leave does not operate as stay; directions for further proceedings given.

Orders

  • Leave to commence judicial review proceedings is granted.
  • Order of status quo to apply to the applicants pending hearing and determination of the intended judicial review.