[2020] KEHC 2354 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 2354 (KLR)

The court held that, in light of the declaration of unconstitutionality of the Contempt of Court Act, the applicable law for contempt proceedings is the English common law as adopted by the Judicature Act. Under this regime, leave is not required to commence contempt proceedings for breach of a court order. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 2354 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Cabinet Secretary for Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government; Respondent: Director, Department of Immigration Services; Respondent: The Attorney General; Applicant: Samira Tariq Qureshi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review Application 406 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Commence Contempt of Court Proceedings
Outcome
Directions issued for service and further hearing of the substantive contempt application; no order as to costs.
Judges
P Nyamweya
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Enforcement of Judgments, Judicial Review Procedure
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Enforcement of Judgments Judicial Review Procedure

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Cabinet Secretary for Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government

Respondent

Director, Department of Immigration Services

Respondent

The Attorney General

Respondent

Samira Tariq Qureshi

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Commence Contempt of Court Proceedings

  1. 1 Whether leave is required to commence contempt of court proceedings following the declaration of unconstitutionality of the Contempt of Court Act.
  2. 2 Whether the ex parte Applicant is entitled to orders for service and further directions regarding the contempt application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, in light of the declaration of unconstitutionality of the Contempt of Court Act, the applicable law for contempt proceedings is the English common law as adopted by the Judicature Act. Under this regime, leave is not required to commence contempt proceedings for breach of a court order. The court found that the Applicant's application for leave was unnecessary but proceeded to give directions to facilitate the substantive hearing of the contempt application. The court ordered the Applicant to serve the Respondents with the relevant documents and set timelines for electronic filing and service, in line with COVID-19 protocols. No order as to costs was made for the...

Court Disposition

Directions issued for service and further hearing of the substantive contempt application; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The ex parte Applicant shall file and personally serve the Respondents with the Chamber Summons dated 24th August 2020, a substantive application for contempt of Court, a copy of this ruling and a mention notice within thirty (30) days.
  • There shall be no order as to costs of the Chamber Summons dated 24th August 2020.