[2007] KEHC 34 (KLR)

[2007] KEHC 34 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants had established an arguable case on a prima facie basis, particularly with respect to the principle of legitimate expectation. However, the court also recognized that the impugned decision involved issues of policy within the Ministry of Housing. Balancing these considerations,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] KEHC 34 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Moses Nderitu Kimaru & Others; Respondent: Ministry of Housing
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 353 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Leave Application
Outcome
Leave to commence judicial review granted; stay refused.
Judges
JW Nyamu
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Legitimate Expectation, Leave to Apply, Policy Decisions
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Judicial Review Legitimate Expectation Leave to Apply Policy Decisions

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moses Nderitu Kimaru & Others

Applicant

Ministry of Housing

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Leave Application

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have established a prima facie case for leave to commence judicial review proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the principle of legitimate expectation applies to the applicants' claim.
  3. 3 Whether leave should operate as a stay of the impugned decision.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had established an arguable case on a prima facie basis, particularly with respect to the principle of legitimate expectation. However, the court also recognized that the impugned decision involved issues of policy within the Ministry of Housing. Balancing these considerations, the court granted leave to commence judicial review proceedings but declined to order that leave operates as a stay of the decision. The court further directed that costs would abide the outcome of the main application and granted liberty to the applicants to seek fast tracking of the substantive application.

Court Disposition

Leave to commence judicial review granted; stay refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review is granted in terms of the application dated 3rd April 2007.
  • Leave shall not operate as a stay of the impugned decision.