https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/6407
Because the application was duly served and remained unopposed, the court allowed mandamus to compel payment of the decretal sum and costs, but declined to order further interest at that stage, holding that the Applicant first needed to serve the decree/order for compliance before seeking enforcement.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 6407 (KLR)
- Parties
- Ex Parte Applicant: Republic; 1st Respondent: The Principal Secretary, Ministry of Education, Science and Technology; 2nd Respondent: The Principal, Mawe Mixed Day Secondary School; Interested Party: Attorney General
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review E013 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Judgment After Unopposed Motion for Mandamus
- Outcome
- Application allowed in part
- Judges
- ["JM Nang'ea"]
- Legal Topics
- Mandamus, Enforcement of Decree, Decretal Sum, Costs, Interest on Judgment Debt
- 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
Ex Parte Applicant
The Principal Secretary, Ministry of Education, Science and Technology
1st Respondent
The Principal, Mawe Mixed Day Secondary School
2nd Respondent
Attorney General
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Unopposed Motion for Mandamus
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether an order of mandamus should issue to compel payment of the decretal sum and costs
- 2 Whether further interest should be ordered without prior service of the decree/order for compliance
- 3 Whether the unopposed application merits the reliefs sought
Ratio Decidendi
Because the application was duly served and remained unopposed, the court allowed mandamus to compel payment of the decretal sum and costs, but declined to order further interest at that stage, holding that the Applicant first needed to serve the decree/order for compliance before seeking enforcement.
Court Disposition
Application allowed in part
Orders
- An order of mandamus issued compelling the 1st and 2nd Respondents jointly and severally to pay the Applicant Kshs. 2,954,391/= being principal and interest arising from the decree in Nakuru CMCC No. E559 of 2021, together with assessed costs of Kshs. 224,725/=, totaling Kshs. 3,179,116/=
- The application was allowed in terms of prayers 1, 2 and 4
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**** **REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU** **JUDICIAL REVIEW E013 OF 2025** **REPUBLIC --------------------------------------- ---------- EX-PARTE APPLICANT** **AGAINST** **THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ------------------------------------------- 1ST RESPONDENT** **THE PRINCIPAL, MAWE MIXED DAY SECONDARY** **SCHOOL ----------------------------------------------------------- 2ND RESPONDENT** **AND** **ATTORNEY GENERAL ----------------------------------- INTERESTED PARTY** **JUDGMENT** 1. On 25/10/2025 the Ex-parte Applicant was granted leave to bring an Application for the Judicial Review Order of *mandamus* against the Respondents. Pursuant to the leave, he filed a Notice of Motion dated 27/10/2025 praying for these orders;- 2. **THAT an order of mandamus do issue compelling the 1st and 2nd Respondents jointly and severally to pay the Applicant the judgement debt in the sum of Kshs. 2,954,391/- (being principal of Kshs. 1,694,000/= and interest of Kshs. 1,260,391/= arising from the decree made on 13 June 2024 in Nakuru CMCC No. E559 of 2021), together with assessed costs of Kshs. 224,725/= making a total of Kshs. 3,179,116/=, together with any interest thereon.** 3. **THAT further interest on the decretal sum be paid at 12% per annum from 13 June 2024 until the date of payment in full.** 4. **THAT the said payment be made within 30 days and in default, unless there is an order to the contrary, a Notice to Show Cause do issue against the 1st and 2nd Respondents jointly and severally why they should not be cited for contempt of Court.** 5. **THAT the Respondents pay the ex parte Applicant’s costs of this Application.** 6. Despite evidence of service of the Application upon them as per Return of Service filed, the Respondents and the Interested Party have not filed any replies. The Application is therefore deemed as unopposed. 7. The Application is allowed in terms of prayers 1, 2 and 4. Regarding prayer 3, the Applicant needs to serve the Decree/Order for compliance in default of which he may seek enforcement. 8. Judgement accordingly. **J.M. NANG’EA - JUDGE.** **Judgement Delivered virtually this 11h day of May, 2026.** **In the presence of:** **Mr. Magata Advocate for the Ex-parte Applicant** **Respondents, Absent** **Court Assistant (Jeniffer)** **J.M. NANG’EA - JUDGE.**