[2020] KEHC 6254 (KLR)
Given that the status and existence of the judgments in HCCC No. 135 of 2008 and Petition No. 99 of 2011 are contested, and both matters were heard in the Machakos High Court, it is proper and convenient for the Machakos High Court to determine the application for leave for judicial review orders of mandamus. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 6254 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Leonard Mackenzie (suing as the administrator of the estate of the late Joyce Mumo Mackenzie); Respondent: The Attorney General; Respondent: The Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review Application 63 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Application for Leave and Transfer of Suit
- Outcome
- Application transferred to Machakos High Court for hearing and determination.
- Judges
- P Nyamweya
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Mandamus Orders, Enforcement of Judgments, Transfer of Suit
- 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
Leonard Mackenzie (suing as the administrator of the estate of the late Joyce Mumo Mackenzie)
Applicant
The Attorney General
Respondent
The Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Application for Leave and Transfer of Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to leave to apply for judicial review orders of mandamus to compel payment of decretal sums awarded in previous suits.
- 2 Whether the application should be heard in the Nairobi High Court or transferred to the Machakos High Court.
Ratio Decidendi
Given that the status and existence of the judgments in HCCC No. 135 of 2008 and Petition No. 99 of 2011 are contested, and both matters were heard in the Machakos High Court, it is proper and convenient for the Machakos High Court to determine the application for leave for judicial review orders of mandamus. The Nairobi High Court lacks the original files and is not the appropriate forum to resolve the factual disputes regarding the underlying judgments. Accordingly, the suit is transferred to the Machakos High Court for further hearing and determination.
Court Disposition
Application transferred to Machakos High Court for hearing and determination.
Orders
- This suit is transferred to the Machakos High Court for further hearing and determination.
- The applicant shall take out new hearing dates for the Chamber Summons dated 4th March 2020 at the Machakos High Court registry.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 63 OF 2020
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW ORDERS OF MANDAMUS
BETWEEN
LEONARD MACKENZIE suing as the administrator of the
estate of the late JOYCE MUMOMACKENZIE).................APPLICANT
VERSUS
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.....................................1ST RESPONDENT
THE PERMANENT SECRETARY, MINISTRY
OF INTERIOR AND COORDINATION
OFNATIONAL GOVERNMENT...............................2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
The Application
1. The Applicant herein has moved this Court in an application brought by way of Chamber Summons dated 4th March 2020. He is seeking leave to apply for judicial review orders of mandamus, to compel the Respondents to effect payment of Kshs 3,574,370. 86/= awarded in High Court Civil Case No. 135 of 2008 as damages, costs and accrued interest. The application is supported by a statutory statement dated 4th April 2020, and a verifying affidavit sworn on the same date by the Applicant.
2. It is notable that after the filing of the said application, court operations were scaled down due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and hearings are now being held electronically. The Applicant in this regard electronically filed an affidavit of service sworn on 5th May 2020, which was sent by email to the Deputy Registrar of this Court on 6th May 2020, attesting to the service of the application on the Respondents.
3. On 5th May 2020, the Respondents filed a replying affidavit, sworn on the same date by James Mwatsuma, an advocate at the State Law Office, which also sent by electronic mail to the Deputy Registrar. The said deponent contended that the suit giving rise to the prayer for leave for orders of mandamus, namely HCCC Suit No. 135 of 2008, was dismissed by the Machakos High Court.
4. In addition, I note from a perusal of the Applicant’s pleadings that the two suits in which the Applicant claims that judgment was entered in his favour for decretal sums and costs, namely HCCC Suit No. 135 of 2008 and High Court Petition No 99 of 2011, were both filed and heard in the Machakos High Court. As the status of, and orders given in the said cases are contested by the Respondents, there will be need to peruse the original files in those cases. It is therefore proper, prudent and more convenient that this application be heard in the Machakos High Court.
The Orders:
5. In the premises I direct and orders as follows:
I.This suit be and is hereby transferred to the Machakos High Court for further hearing and determination.
II.The Applicant shall take out new hearing dates for the Chamber Summons dated 4th March 2020 at the Machakos High Court registry.
III.The Deputy Registrar of the Judicial Review Division shall send acopy of this ruling and orders by electronic mail to theApplicant, Respondent, and to the Deputy Registrar of the MachakosHigh Court,by close of business on Friday, 8th May 2020.
6. Orders accordingly.
DATED AND SIGNED AT NAIROBI THIS 6th DAY OF MAY 2020
P. NYAMWEYA
JUDGE