[2022] KEPPDT 929 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that the substantive prayers of the complaint had been settled, as the 2nd Respondent had already complied by forwarding the Complainant's name as nominee. The only outstanding issue was costs. Applying the trite principle that costs follow the cause, and since the Complainant's cause had...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEPPDT 929 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Bernard Munase Mukhombwa; Respondent: Jafred Muchesia Ngaira; Respondent: Ford - Kenya; Respondent: Joel Amuna Ruhu
- Court
- Political Parties Disputes Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Complaint E008 (KK) of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Election Petition / Judgment
- Outcome
- Complaint marked as settled with costs to the Complainant.
- Judges
- ML Odongo, T K Tororey, L Wambui
- Legal Topics
- Party Nominations, Nomination Disputes, Costs Award
- 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
Bernard Munase Mukhombwa
Applicant
Jafred Muchesia Ngaira
Respondent
Ford - Kenya
Respondent
Joel Amuna Ruhu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Election Petition / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1st Respondent was qualified to participate in the nomination for Isukha North Ward member of County Assembly.
- 2 Whether the Ford Kenya Party should be compelled to submit the Complainant's name as nominee to the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission.
- 3 Who should bear the costs of the complaint.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the substantive prayers of the complaint had been settled, as the 2nd Respondent had already complied by forwarding the Complainant's name as nominee. The only outstanding issue was costs. Applying the trite principle that costs follow the cause, and since the Complainant's cause had succeeded, the Tribunal awarded costs to the Complainant.
Court Disposition
Complaint marked as settled with costs to the Complainant.
Orders
- The complaint herein is marked as settled with costs to the Complainant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Mukhombwa v Ngaira & 2 others (Complaint E008 (KK) of 2022) [2022] KEPPDT 929 (KLR) (16 May 2022) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEPPDT 929 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal
Complaint E008 (KK) of 2022
ML Odongo, Presiding Member, T K Tororey & L Wambui, Members
May 16, 2022
Between
Bernard Munase Mukhombwa
Complainant
and
Jafred Muchesia Ngaira
1st Respondent
Ford - Kenya
2nd Respondent
Joel Amuna Ruhu
3rd Respondent
Judgment
Background 1. The complaint filed herein is undefended as the 1st and 3rd Respondents have since supported the Complainant and expressed no interest in proceeding with the nomination process that is the subject issue herein.
2. The complaint had sought the following orders:-a.An interim injuction is hereby issued restraining the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission from gazetting or otherwise recognising Mr. Jafred Muchesia Ngaira as the Ford- Kenya Nominee for Isukha North Ward.b.A declaration is hereby issued that Jafred Muchesia Ngaira, the 1st Respondent herein was not and is not qualified to participate in the nomination of Isukha North Ward member of County Assembly since he is still an employee of the County Government of Kakamega.c.An order is issued directing and compelling the Ford Kenya Party, 2nd Respondent to uphold the Nomination Certificate of the complainant and to submit the name of the Complainant to the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission as the nominee to the represent the party in Isukha North Ward, Kakamega County.d.Costs of the Claim be borne by the Respondents.
3. During the pendency of the matter herein, the 2nd Respondent duly complied and forwarded the name of the Complainant as its nominee for the position in issue. This is confirmed through the further affidavit filed by the Complainant which they swore on May 13, 2022.
4. The matter is thus settled in so far as prayers (a) to (c) of the complaint is concerned.
5. The parties have however been unable to agree on costs
6. It is trite law that costs follow the cause and the Complainants cause has had the day.
7. In light of our the aforesaid we order as follows:a.That the Complaint herein be marked as settled with costs to the Complainant.
DATED THIS 16TH DAY OF MAY 2022M. L. ODONGO (PRESIDING MEMBER)TOROREY TIMOTHY KIPCHIRCHIR (MEMBER)DR. LYDIAH WAMBUI (MEMBER)