[2023] KEELRC 261 (KLR)

[2023] KEELRC 261 (KLR)

The court found that the ex-parte applicant had obtained a valid judgment and decree against the respondents, and that all necessary certificates had been issued. The respondents failed to comply with the decree and did not provide any response or justification for their non-compliance. The court held that in such...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELRC 261 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Commissioner General Of Prisons; Respondent: Public Service Commission; Applicant: Musa Kiprono Cheruiyot
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review E014 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Motion for Order of Mandamus
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
S Radido
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Mandamus Orders, Government Liability, Decree Enforcement
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Civil Procedure Judicial Review Mandamus Orders Government Liability Decree Enforcement

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Commissioner General Of Prisons

Respondent

Public Service Commission

Respondent

Musa Kiprono Cheruiyot

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Motion for Order of Mandamus

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are obligated to comply with a court decree and pay the decretal sum to the ex-parte applicant.
  2. 2 Whether an order of mandamus should issue to compel payment by the government officer.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the ex-parte applicant had obtained a valid judgment and decree against the respondents, and that all necessary certificates had been issued. The respondents failed to comply with the decree and did not provide any response or justification for their non-compliance. The court held that in such circumstances, an order of mandamus is the appropriate remedy to compel the government officer responsible to satisfy the decretal sum. The absence of any response from the respondents further justified the grant of the order. The court therefore issued an order of mandamus against the 1st respondent's accounting officer to pay the decretal sum with interest, and awarded costs...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • An order of mandamus is issued against the 1st respondent's accounting officer compelling payment of Kshs 546,000 plus interest to the ex-parte applicant.
  • The ex-parte applicant is awarded costs of the motion.