[2019] KEST 103 (KLR)

[2019] KEST 103 (KLR)

The tribunal found that the appellant's request for independent resampling and testing of the goods was reasonable, justified, and consistent with ordinary business practice, especially as the appellant was willing to bear the costs. The respondent's refusal to allow resampling was unreasoned and unsupported by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEST 103 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: New Italycor Limited; Respondent: Kenya Bureau of Standards
Court
Standards Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Appeal 1 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application allowed in part
Legal Topics
Standards Compliance, Right to Fair Administrative Action, Import Regulation, Product Testing
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Commercial and Corporate Standards Compliance Right to Fair Administrative Action Import Regulation Product Testing

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

New Italycor Limited

Appellant

Kenya Bureau of Standards

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tribunal Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to an independent resampling and testing of goods held by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal was filed within the stipulated timelines under the Standards Tribunal rules.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's refusal to allow resampling and testing was reasonable and justified.

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the appellant's request for independent resampling and testing of the goods was reasonable, justified, and consistent with ordinary business practice, especially as the appellant was willing to bear the costs. The respondent's refusal to allow resampling was unreasoned and unsupported by affidavit evidence, leaving the appellant's factual averments uncontested. The tribunal further held that the appeal was properly admitted within the stipulated timelines, or in the alternative, that it had discretion to extend time in the absence of prejudice. Accordingly, the tribunal allowed the application to the extent of directing the respondent to conduct resampling and...

Court Disposition

application allowed in part

Orders

  • The respondent is directed to conduct resampling and testing of the goods in the presence of the appellant’s duly appointed representative within 14 days.
  • The applicant shall wholly meet the cost of resampling and testing to be conducted.