[2019] KEHC 3482 (KLR)
The court held that the applicant, Edward Kings Onyancha Maina, lacked locus standi as he was never a party to the original judicial review proceedings. Previous rulings had already determined that he was an intermeddler and not entitled to participate. The court further found that the application was brought after...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 3482 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Interstate Petroleum Company Ltd; Respondent: Permanent Secretary Ministry of Energy; Interested Party: Turkana Drilling Consortium Limited; Interested Party: Lundin Kenya B.V.; Interested Party: Africa Oil Corporation; Interested Party: Platform Resources Inc; Interested Party: Centric Energy Corporation (now 0903658 B.C. Ltd); Contributor: Edward Kings Onyancha Maina
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review 30 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Ruling on Application to Rectify and Nullify Prior Ruling and for Joinder
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- HK Chemitei
- Legal Topics
- Locus Standi, Joinder of Parties, Abuse of Process
- 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
Interstate Petroleum Company Ltd
Applicant
Permanent Secretary Ministry of Energy
Respondent
Turkana Drilling Consortium Limited
Interested Party
Lundin Kenya B.V.
Interested Party
Africa Oil Corporation
Interested Party
Platform Resources Inc
Interested Party
Centric Energy Corporation (now 0903658 B.C. Ltd)
Interested Party
Edward Kings Onyancha Maina
Contributor
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Application to Rectify and Nullify Prior Ruling and for Joinder
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a non-party to the original judicial review proceedings has locus standi to seek rectification and nullification of a prior court ruling.
- 2 Whether the application is an abuse of court process due to delay and lack of standing.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the applicant, Edward Kings Onyancha Maina, lacked locus standi as he was never a party to the original judicial review proceedings. Previous rulings had already determined that he was an intermeddler and not entitled to participate. The court further found that the application was brought after an inordinate delay and that the parties to the original decision had moved on, indicating no ongoing controversy requiring intervention. The application was therefore deemed vexatious and an abuse of the court's discretion, warranting dismissal with costs to the respondents.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application is dismissed with costs to the respondents.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
38 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KITALE
JUDICIAL REVIEW CAUSE NO. 30 OF 2010
BETWEEN
REPUBLIC
VERSES
PERMANENT SECRETARY MINISTRY OF ENERGY
AND
TURKANA DRILLING CONSORTIUM LIMITED...1ST INTERESTED PARTY
LUNDIN KENYA B.V.....................................................2ND INTERESTED PARTY
AFRICA OIL CORPORARTION.................................3RD INTERESTED PARTY
PLATFORM RESOURCES INC..................................4TH INTERESTED PARTY
CENTRIC ENERGY CORPORATION
(NOW 0903658 B. C. LTD)............................................5TH INTERESTED PARTY
INTERSTATE PETROLEUM COMPANY LTD...........EX PARTE APPLICANT
AND
EDWARD KINGS ONYANCHA MAINA...................................CONTRIBUTOR
RULING
1. By his Notice of Motion application dated 22nd August 2017, the 5TH Contributor hereinafter referred to as the Applicant prayed among others that the ruling of this court dated 16th December, 2010 be rectified and nullified. He has also prayed that the Applicant M/s Interstate Petroleum Ltd be enjoined as a party .
2. The Applicant through his lengthy and at times with mixture of issues explained the genesis of the matter and how he was aggrieved with the decisions of Hon. Justice Koome, (as she then was) as well as Hon. Justice Githinji. In his supporting affidavit he has attached the said rulings dismissed the judicial review application.
3. Hon. Justice Githinji on his part in the ruling dated 20th May, 2011 decline to recognise the Applicant as a party in the matter and he therefore dismissed the application.
4. The Interested Parties have opposed the said application and have basically raised an objection that the Applicant has no locus as he was not a party to the Judicial Review application herein. They content that the same is generally vexatious and abuse of the court process.
5. The parties have filed written submissions which I do not intent to reproduce here. The Applicant it must be appreciated has been acting alone all through. The pertinent question which I consider preliminary is what the Respondents have raised namely whether in light of the fact that the Applicant was never a party in the Judicial Review cause he can bring such an application.
6. The rulings by Hon. Justice Githinji in my view settled the issue. He was found to be an intermeddler in this cause and thus the door was shut on him. As regards the decision of Hon. Justice Koome, the Applicant was never a party and to the extend he cannot impugned that decision. At any rate the parties to that decision seemed to have been satisfied and have moved on.
7. More significantly the application has been brought inordinately late after very many years yet he seemed to have been on board generally.
8. In dismissing the application therefore I find the same to be vexatious and an abuse of the courts discretion. The application is dismissed with costs to the Respondents.
Dated and signed and delivered at Kitale in the open court this 15th day of May, 2019.
___________________
H.K. CHEMITEI
JUDGE
15/5/19
In the presence of:-
Edward Kings Maina – Contrubutor – present
Barongo for Mailu for Applicant
Barongo for Leshan
Court Assistant – Kirong
Ruling read in open court.