[2025] KEHC 2179 (KLR)
The High Court declined to grant leave to apply for judicial review orders because the applicants had an alternative remedy before the Small Claims Court, which issued the decree and proclamation notice. The court found that it lacked jurisdiction to interfere with the execution process of the Small Claims Court, as...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 2179 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Grace Muthoni; Applicant: James Kamwathi; Applicant: Fredrick Njuguna; Applicant: Mary Njeri; Applicant: Richard Mathu; Applicant: Thomas Wahome (Suing on His Behalf and on Behalf of Helicopter of Christ Church); Respondent: Okuku Agencies Auctioneers; Respondent: Briar Rose Kindergaten School
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E017 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Ruling on Ex Parte Chamber Summons for Leave and Stay
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review Leave, Stay of Execution, Small Claims Court Jurisdiction
- 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
Grace Muthoni
Applicant
James Kamwathi
Applicant
Fredrick Njuguna
Applicant
Mary Njeri
Applicant
Richard Mathu
Applicant
Thomas Wahome (Suing on His Behalf and on Behalf of Helicopter of Christ Church)
Applicant
Okuku Agencies Auctioneers
Respondent
Briar Rose Kindergaten School
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Ex Parte Chamber Summons for Leave and Stay
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court should grant leave to apply for judicial review orders of certiorari and prohibition against enforcement of a Small Claims Court decree.
- 2 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to stay or set aside execution proceedings issued by the Small Claims Court.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court declined to grant leave to apply for judicial review orders because the applicants had an alternative remedy before the Small Claims Court, which issued the decree and proclamation notice. The court found that it lacked jurisdiction to interfere with the execution process of the Small Claims Court, as the proper forum for such applications is the court that issued the orders. There was no urgency demonstrated to warrant certification of the application as urgent. The application was therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction and justification.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The ex parte chamber summons dated 12/2/2025 is dismissed.
- No orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
35 paragraphs
Muthoni & 5 others v Okuku Agencies Auctioneers & another (Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E017 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 2179 (KLR) (Judicial Review) (13 February 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 2179 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Judicial Review
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E017 of 2025
RE Aburili, J
February 13, 2025
Between
Grace Muthoni
1st Applicant
James Kamwathi
2nd Applicant
Fredrick Njuguna
3rd Applicant
Mary Njeri
4th Applicant
Richard Mathu
5th Applicant
Thomas Wahome (Suing on His Behalf and on Behalf of Helicopter of Christ Church)
6th Applicant
and
Okuku Agencies Auctioneers
1st Respondent
Briar Rose Kindergaten School
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. I have considered the Chamber Summons dated 12th February, 2025 filed under certificate of urgency. I observe that the applicant seeks leave of court to apply to quash the proclamation notice dated 11/2/2025 and Decree and Warrants dated 4/2/2025 and prohibition restraining the Respondents from enforcing a decree and warrants of attachment and sale of movable property in execution of decree of the Small Claims Court E7359/2023 and that leave so granted to operate as stay of enforcement of the said decree and proclamation.
2. I find no urgency involved. I decline to certify the application as urgent.
3. On the prayer for leave to apply, I observe that the matter in question is before the Small Claims Court and the applicant claims that the decree was settled hence there is no justification for further execution of the decree.
4. That being the case, the court that has jurisdiction to hear and determine the application for stay and setting aside of the proclamation notice is the Small Claims Court which issued decree and proclamation notice.
5. This court has no power to interfere with the power of the civil court.
6. I find no justification for granting of leave to apply for Judicial Review orders of certiorari and prohibition. I proceed and dismiss the ex parte chamber summons dated 12/2/2025 with no orders as to costs.
7. This file is closed. I so order.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025. R.E. ABURILIJUDGE