[2025] KEHC 345 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had filed a notice of withdrawal of the judicial review application in its entirety, with no orders as to costs, on the basis that the matter was similar to another pending before a different judge. The court exercised its discretion under the Civil Procedure Rules to allow the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 345 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Nicholas Alexander Nesbitt; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: Directorate of Criminal Investigations
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review Application E013 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Application / Withdrawal Ruling
- Outcome
- Application withdrawn with no orders as to costs; file closed.
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review Procedure, Withdrawal of Application
- 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
Nicholas Alexander Nesbitt
Applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Directorate of Criminal Investigations
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Withdrawal Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant's notice of withdrawal of the judicial review application should be allowed without orders as to costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had filed a notice of withdrawal of the judicial review application in its entirety, with no orders as to costs, on the basis that the matter was similar to another pending before a different judge. The court exercised its discretion under the Civil Procedure Rules to allow the withdrawal and marked the application as wholly withdrawn with no orders as to costs, noting that no prejudice would be occasioned to the respondents and that the withdrawal was made before substantive hearing.
Court Disposition
Application withdrawn with no orders as to costs; file closed.
Orders
- The Originating Motion and Notice of Motion dated 23/1/2025 are marked as wholly withdrawn with no orders as to costs.
- The file is closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Nesbitt v Director of Public Prosecutions & another (Judicial Review Application E013 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 345 (KLR) (Judicial Review) (24 January 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 345 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Judicial Review
Judicial Review Application E013 of 2025
RE Aburili, J
January 24, 2025
Between
Nicholas Alexander Nesbitt
Applicant
and
Director of Public Prosecutions
1st Respondent
Directorate of Criminal Investigations
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. I have considered the Notice of Motion dated 23/1/2025 accompanying the Originating Motion dated 23/1/2025, the grounds and supporting affidavit together with the annextures thereto.
2. I observe that upon filing of the Originating Summons and the Notice of Motion, the applicant filed notice of withdrawal of the application dated 23/1/2025 against the Respondents in its entirety and with no orders as to costs as it is a similar matter with one filed before Justice Chigiti SC.
3. Accordingly, I hereby mark the Originating Motion and Notice of Motion dated 23/1/2025 as wholly withdrawn with no orders as to costs and this file is closed.
4. The Ruling to be typed and uploaded in the e-portal and the applicant to be notified via email.
5. I so order.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025. R.E. ABURILIJUDGE