[2009] KEHC 1891 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 1891 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants had demonstrated an arguable case sufficient to warrant the grant of leave to commence judicial review proceedings for orders of certiorari and prohibition. Although the facts did not clearly indicate the stage of the process complained of, the court exercised its discretion to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 1891 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Attorney-General; Respondent: Minister for Cooperatives Development & Marketing; Respondent: John Nyenze; Respondent: David Odhiambo Oduor; Respondent: Sakina Adan (Mrs); Respondent: Zebedeo Onguti; Respondent: Hanold Rurigi Mwai; Respondent: Joseph Kibowen Kibiwott; Respondent: Amb. John Mukuriah; Respondent: Machanja Ligabo (Dr.); Respondent: Emily Manga Mwachoo (Mrs); Respondent: Philip Gichuki (Secretary)
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 399 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave and Stay Orders
Outcome
Leave granted for judicial review; limited stay granted; procedural dispensation ordered.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Certiorari, Prohibition, Leave to Apply, Stay Orders
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Certiorari Prohibition Leave to Apply Stay Orders

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney-General

Applicant

Minister for Cooperatives Development & Marketing

Respondent

John Nyenze

Respondent

David Odhiambo Oduor

Respondent

Sakina Adan (Mrs)

Respondent

Zebedeo Onguti

Respondent

Hanold Rurigi Mwai

Respondent

Joseph Kibowen Kibiwott

Respondent

Amb. John Mukuriah

Respondent

Machanja Ligabo (Dr.)

Respondent

Emily Manga Mwachoo (Mrs)

Respondent

Philip Gichuki (Secretary)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave and Stay Orders

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated an arguable case to warrant leave for judicial review proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether a stay of implementation of the impugned decisions should be granted pending hearing.
  3. 3 Whether the requirement for prior service of notice on the Registrar should be dispensed with.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had demonstrated an arguable case sufficient to warrant the grant of leave to commence judicial review proceedings for orders of certiorari and prohibition. Although the facts did not clearly indicate the stage of the process complained of, the court exercised its discretion to grant a limited stay of the release and/or further implementation of the impugned decisions, but only with respect to the applicants and up to a specified date. The court also dispensed with the requirement for prior service of notice on the Registrar, considering the nature of the application and the lack of specificity in the request. The orders were made subject to the...

Court Disposition

Leave granted for judicial review; limited stay granted; procedural dispensation ordered.

Orders

  • Requirement of prior service of notice on the Registrar is dispensed with.
  • Leave is granted to applicants to file judicial review proceedings for certiorari and prohibition. Notice of Motion to be filed and served within 10 days, otherwise leave lapses.