[2024] KEHC 11368 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's notice of motion did not demonstrate any urgency warranting certification as urgent. Accordingly, the application was not certified as urgent. The court set out a timetable for service of the application, filing of responses, and exchange of written submissions to ensure orderly...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 11368 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Majock Construction Co Ltd; Respondent: The Executive Committee Member For Finance & 3 others
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review E003 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Ruling on Preliminary Application
- Outcome
- Application not certified as urgent; directions issued for service and filing of responses and submissions.
- Judges
- MS Shariff
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review Procedure, Urgency Certification, Service of 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
Majock Construction Co Ltd
Applicant
The Executive Committee Member For Finance & 3 others
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Preliminary Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application demonstrates sufficient urgency to warrant certification as urgent.
- 2 What are the appropriate timelines for service and filing of responses and submissions in this judicial review application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's notice of motion did not demonstrate any urgency warranting certification as urgent. Accordingly, the application was not certified as urgent. The court set out a timetable for service of the application, filing of responses, and exchange of written submissions to ensure orderly progression of the judicial review proceedings. The matter was scheduled for mention to confirm compliance with these directions.
Court Disposition
Application not certified as urgent; directions issued for service and filing of responses and submissions.
Orders
- The application is not certified as urgent as no urgency has been demonstrated.
- The application to be served within 4 days from the date of the ruling.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
Majock Construction Co Ltd v Executive Committee Member for Finance & 3 others (Judicial Review E003 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 11368 (KLR) (27 September 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 11368 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Judicial Review E003 of 2024
MS Shariff, J
September 27, 2024
Between
Majock Construction Co Ltd
Applicant
and
The Executive Committee Member For Finance & 3 others
Respondent
Ruling
1. I have perused the notice of motion dated 26. 9.2024, the affidavit in support thereof and the enclosures and I do hereby make the following orders:-1. This application is not certified as urgent as no urgency has been demonstrated.2. The same be served within 4 days from the date hereof.3. The Applicant/Respondent to file and serve a response thereto within 10 days from the date hereof.4. The Respondents/Applicants to file and serve written submissions 15 days from the date hereof and the Applicant/Respondent to do so within 20 days from the date hereof.5. Mention on 17/10/24 to confirm compliance.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 27THDAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024. M. S. SHARIFFJUDGE