[2021] KEHC 13242 (KLR)
The court found that Kisii University is a necessary party to the petition because the closure of its campuses, which is the subject of the dispute, was effected by its own actions following the decisions of the 1st Respondent. The Petitioners' rights and fundamental freedoms are alleged to have been violated...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 13242 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kirwa Arap Bitok; Applicant: Benjamin Kikoech Kiptanui; Applicant: Hellen Saina; Applicant: Dynaline Jebiwot Kibet; Applicant: Kipchumba Kiptoo; Respondent: The Commission; Respondent: Cabinet Secretary to the Ministry of Education, Science; Respondent: Kisii University
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 511 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Application for Joinder and Amendment of Pleadings
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- AC Mrima
- Legal Topics
- Joinder of Parties, Amendment of Pleadings, Right to Fair Hearing, Regulatory Decisions, Student Rights
- 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
Kirwa Arap Bitok
Applicant
Benjamin Kikoech Kiptanui
Applicant
Hellen Saina
Applicant
Dynaline Jebiwot Kibet
Applicant
Kipchumba Kiptoo
Applicant
The Commission
Respondent
Cabinet Secretary to the Ministry of Education, Science
Respondent
Kisii University
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Application for Joinder and Amendment of Pleadings
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Kisii University should be joined as the 3rd Respondent in the constitutional petition.
- 2 Whether the Petitioners should be allowed to amend their pleadings to include Kisii University as a party.
- 3 Whether the joinder is necessary for the proper determination of the issues in dispute.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that Kisii University is a necessary party to the petition because the closure of its campuses, which is the subject of the dispute, was effected by its own actions following the decisions of the 1st Respondent. The Petitioners' rights and fundamental freedoms are alleged to have been violated through the joint actions of the 1st Respondent and Kisii University. The court held that the joinder of Kisii University is essential for the proper and complete determination of the issues in dispute, and that no party would be prejudiced by such joinder. The court also found that there was no evidence of bad faith on the part of the Petitioners in seeking the amendment, and that...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- Kisii University is hereby enjoined in this Petition as the 3rd Respondent.
- The Petitioners shall within 14 days file and serve an Amended Petition.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
53 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISION
(Coram: A.C. Mrima, J.)
CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION NO. 511 OF 2016
1. KIRWA ARAP BITOK
2. BENJAMIN KIKOECH KIPTANUI
3. HELLEN SAINA
4. DYNALINE JEBIWOT KIBET
5. KIPCHUMBA KIPTOO........................................................PETITIONERS
-VERSUS-
THE COMMISSION.............................................................1ST RESPONDENT
THE CABINET SECRETARY TO THE
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, SCIENCE........................2ND RESPONDENT
-AND-
KISII UNIVERSITY...................................PROPOSED 3RD RESPONDENT
RULING NO. 1
1. Before Court for consideration is an application by the Petitioners by way of a Notice of Motion dated 1st March, 2017.
2. The application seeks the following orders: -
1. THAT this Honorable Court be pleased to allow the Petitioner herein to amend his pleadings dated 5th December, 2016 by adding Kisii University College as the 3rd Respondent.
2. THAT further to amending the Petition dated 5th December, 2016 this Honorable Court be pleased to give a priority hearing date for the suit herein.
3. THAT the costs of this Application be provided for.
3. The application is premised on the seven grounds appearing on its body and is supported by the Affidavit sworn by the 1st Petitioner herein, Kirwa arap Bitok on 1st March, 2017.
4. The application is opposed by the 1st and 2nd Respondents as well as by the proposed 3rd Respondent.
5. On directions of this Court, parties filed written submissions to the application.
6. Having carefully read and understood the Petition, the responses thereto, the application, rival arguments, the respective submissions and the decisions referred to by the parties, I am of the considered position that the Notice of Motion dated 1st March, 2017 is merited.
7. The said decision is arrived at on the basis of the following inter alia reasons: -
(i) The 1st Respondent is the regulator of the proposed 3rd Respondent;
(ii) The 1st Respondent made decisions leading to the closure of 10 campuses of the proposed 3rd Respondent;
(iii) The proposed 3rd Respondent accepted and acted on the decisions by the 1st Respondent;
(iv) The Petitioners were among many other students then in the 10 campuses of the proposed 3rd Respondent who allege to have been variously affected by the 1st Respondent’s decisions to close the said campuses down and which decisions were effected by the proposed 3rd Respondent;
(v) The Petitioners allege several violations of their rights and fundamental freedoms arising from the joint actions of the 1st Respondent and the proposed 3rd Respondent;
(vi) Rule 2 of the Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice and Procedure Rules, 2013 define a ‘Respondent’ to mean a person who is alleged to have denied, violated or infringed, or threatened to deny, violate or infringe a right or fundamental freedom;
(vii) The joinder of the proposed 3rd Respondent is, hence, necessary for the proper determination of the matters in dispute;
(viii) The proposed 3rd Respondent is, therefore, a necessary party in these proceedings and will aid the Court in the proceedings;
(ix) There is no demonstration of bad faith on the part of the Petitioners in seeking the joinder of the proposed 3rd Respondent;
(x) The Court has the jurisdiction to allow the application;
(xi) None of the parties in the Petition shall in any way be prejudiced by the joinder of the proposed 3rd Respondent;
(xii) Case law has established various principles for consideration in joinder applications. The principles are largely in favour of the joinder in this matter;
8. As a result of the foregoing, the following orders do hereby issue: -
(a) Kisii University is hereby enjoined in this Petition as the 3rd Respondent;
(b) The Petitioners shall within 14 days’ file and serve an Amended Petition;
(c) The Respondents shall be at liberty to file and serve their respective responses to the Amended Petition within 14 days of service;
(d) The Petitioners shall then file and serve any rejoinder responses, if need be, within 10 days of service;
(e) Directions on a date to be agreed upon by the parties and the Court.
9. Orders accordingly.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT NAIROBI THIS 29TH DAY OF JULY 2021
A. C. MRIMA
JUDGE
Ruling No. 1virtually delivered in the presence of:
Mr. Obae,Counsel for the Petitioners.
Miss. Kemboi,Counsel for the proposed 3rd Respondent.
Elizabeth Wambui –Court Assistant