https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8638
The court found the affidavit of service defective as to the 4th Respondent because the Deputy Governor’s name was wrongly stated, but upheld service on the 1st to 3rd Respondents. Because those respondents failed to appear and show cause for non-payment, the court ordered issuance of a warrant of arrest and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 8638 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; 1st Respondent: County Executive Committee Member Finance and Economic Planning; 2nd Respondent: County Chief Officer Finance and Economic Planning; 3rd Respondent: County Secretary; 4th Respondent: County Government of Taita Taveta; Ex Parte Applicant: Aisha Mlisho Maliki; Ex Parte Applicant: Brighton Mwanyama Kirigha
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review Application E003 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Service and Committal Proceedings for Failure to Pay/defer Directive
- Outcome
- Partly allowed
- Judges
- ["A Mshila"]
- Legal Topics
- Service of Process, Defective Affidavit of Service, Warrant of Arrest, Civil Jail, Committal for Non Compliance With Court Orders
- 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
Republic
Applicant
County Executive Committee Member Finance and Economic Planning
1st Respondent
County Chief Officer Finance and Economic Planning
2nd Respondent
County Secretary
3rd Respondent
County Government of Taita Taveta
4th Respondent
Aisha Mlisho Maliki
Ex Parte Applicant
Brighton Mwanyama Kirigha
Ex Parte Applicant
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Service and Committal Proceedings for Failure to Pay/defer Directive
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether service on the 4th Respondent was defective due to an error in the affidavit of service
- 2 Whether service on the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents was properly effected
- 3 Whether the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents should be committed to civil jail for failing to comply with the payment order
Ratio Decidendi
The court found the affidavit of service defective as to the 4th Respondent because the Deputy Governor’s name was wrongly stated, but upheld service on the 1st to 3rd Respondents. Because those respondents failed to appear and show cause for non-payment, the court ordered issuance of a warrant of arrest and committal to civil jail for 30 days upon payment of subsistence costs by the applicant.
Court Disposition
Partly allowed
Orders
- Fresh service to be effected on the 4th Respondent due to defective service.
- Warrant of arrest to issue against the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Republic v County Executive Committee Member Finance and Economic Planning & 3 others; Maliki & another (Ex parte Applicants) (Suing as the Administrators of the Estate of the Late Livingstone Kirigha Mwadime) (Judicial Review Application E003 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 8638 (KLR) (22 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 8638 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Voi Judicial Review Application E003 of 2026 A Mshila, J June 22, 2026 Between Republic Applicant and County Executive Committee Member Finance and Economic Planning 1st Respondent County Chief Officer Finance and Economic Planning 2nd Respondent County Secretary 3rd Respondent County Government of Taita Taveta 4th Respondent and Aisha Mlisho Maliki Ex parte Applicant Brighton Mwanyama Kirigha Ex parte Applicant Suing as the Administrators of the Estate of the Late Livingstone Kirigha Mwadime Ruling 1.The Affidavit of Service dated 8th June 2026 has an error at paragraph 6 of the same. The name of the Deputy Governor appears to be incorrect. Therefore the service on that office is defective and the Applicant is directed to effect service again on the 4th Respondent 2.As for the 1st to 2nd and 3rd Respondents – service was properly effected but they are absent to Show Cause Why they should not be committed to civil jail for failing to effect the payment as directed. 3.In the circumstances warrant of arrest be effect against the 1st to 2nd and 3rd Respondents and they be committed to 30 days civil jail upon the Applicant paying for their subsistence at prison for 30 days.Orders accordingly. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIA TEAMS THIS 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2026 IN OPEN COURT AT VOI HIGH COURT.A. MSHILAJUDGEIn the presence of:-Court Assistant: Millicent/TrizahKiwinga for the ApplicantNo appearance by Respondent