[2019] KESC 78 (KLR)
The Supreme Court held that the applicant, Adrian Kamotho Njenga, failed to satisfy the conditions for admission as an interested party. Specifically, he did not demonstrate how he would be affected by the ultimate decision of the court or what prejudice he would suffer if not enjoined. Furthermore, the applicant's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KESC 78 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Khelef Khalifa; Applicant: Samwel M. Mohochi; Applicant: Nahashon G. Kamau; Respondent: Chairperson, Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission; Respondent: Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission; Appellant: Adrian Kamotho Njenga
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Court Station
- Supreme Court of Kenya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 17 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Application / Ruling on Application for Joinder as Interested Party
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- I Lenaola
- Legal Topics
- Joinder of Parties, Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Public Interest Litigation
- 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
Khelef Khalifa
Applicant
Samwel M. Mohochi
Applicant
Nahashon G. Kamau
Applicant
Chairperson, Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission
Respondent
Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission
Respondent
Adrian Kamotho Njenga
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Application / Ruling on Application for Joinder as Interested Party
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated a legitimate interest to be enjoined as an interested party in the proceedings.
- 2 Whether the applicant will be affected by the outcome or suffer prejudice if not enjoined.
- 3 Whether the applicant's proposed arguments are novel or merely a replication of existing arguments before the court.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that the applicant, Adrian Kamotho Njenga, failed to satisfy the conditions for admission as an interested party. Specifically, he did not demonstrate how he would be affected by the ultimate decision of the court or what prejudice he would suffer if not enjoined. Furthermore, the applicant's proposed arguments were not novel but rather a repetition of issues already before the court. As such, the application for joinder as an interested party was dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The Notice of Motion dated 25th October, 2017 is hereby dismissed.
- No orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
38 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
(Coram: Maraga, CJ & P, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Njoki & Lenaola, SCJJ)
PETITION (APPLICATION) NO. 17 OF 2017
-BETWEEN-
KHELEF KHALIFA....................................................1ST PETITIONER
SAMWEL M. MOHOCHI...........................................2ND PETITIONER
NAHASHON G. KAMAU.............................................3RD PETITIONER
-AND-
CHAIRPERSON, INDEPENDENT
ELECTORAL & BOUNDARIES COMMISSION...1ST RESPONDENT
INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL
& BOUNDARIES COMMISSION.............................2ND RESPONDENT
-AND-
ADRIAN KAMOTHO NJENGA......INTENDED INTERESTED PARTY
(Being an Application for leave to be enjoined as an Interested Party brought under Articles 2(1), 3(1), 10, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 159, 160, 163, 258 and 259 of the Constitution, Section 3 of the Supreme Court Act and Rule 25 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2012)
RULING OF THE COURT
[1]This is a Notice of Motion Application dated 25th October, 2017 and filed on even date by Adrian Kamotho Njenga, seeking to be enjoined as an Interested Party in the substantive appeal before us.
[2]The Application is supported by the Applicant’s affidavit sworn on 25th October, 2017. The Applicant urges that he has a legitimate interest to be enjoined in the proceeding, since he proposes to argue matters of “crucial public interest”. He takes the position that the Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the substantive appeal, as the subject matter therein does not arise under Article 140 of the Constitution. Further, he proposes that the petitioners have not exhausted the available judicial avenues, before approaching this Court.
[3]Having considered the Application and even without the benefit of other parties’ responses, it is our finding that the Applicant has not satisfied the conditions for admission as an Interested Party as set out in the cases of Trusted Society of Human Rights Alliance v. Mumo Matemu & 5 OthersSupreme Court Petition No. 12 of 2013; [2014] eKLR and Francis Karioki Muruatetu & Another v. Republic & 5 Others SC Petition No. 15 & 16 of 2015; [2016] eKLR. We say so because the applicant has not demonstrated how he will be affected by the ultimate decision of the Court or what prejudice he will suffer if he is not enjoined. In addition, the applicant’s proposed arguments are not novel, but rather a replication of what is already before the Court.
ORDERS
(a) The Notice of Motion dated 25th October, 2017 is hereby dismissed.
(b) No Orders as to costs.
Orders accordingly.
DATED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 8th day, of May, 2019.
………………..... ……..……………..
D. K. MARAGA M. K. IBRAHIM
CHIEF JUSTICE & PRESIDENT JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE SUPREME COURT
…………………. ………….……..….
S. C. WANJALA NJOKI NDUNGU
JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT
………………..
I. LENAOLA
JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT
I certify that this is a truecopy of the original.
REGISTRAR
SUPREME COURT OF KENYA