https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11088

https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11088

The court held that the application had merit because the prejudice alleged by the interested parties was not demonstrated, the dispute was essentially between the ex parte applicants and the interested parties with the respondent acting as an umpire, and the court had jurisdiction to extend a period previously...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEHC 11088 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Respondent: The Office of Data Protection Commissioner; 1st Interested Party: Hellen Shikanda; 2nd Interested Party: Nation Media Group Plc; 3rd Interested Party: The Sacred Heart of Mukumu Girls School
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review E382 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Application to Extend Time/orders Previously Granted
Outcome
Application allowed
Judges
["WM Musyoka"]
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Mandamus, Compliance With Court Orders, Administrative Delay, Prejudice to Interested Parties, Inherent Jurisdiction
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Data Protection Law Judicial Review Extension of Time Mandamus Compliance With Court Orders Administrative Delay Prejudice to Interested Parties +1 more

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

The Office of Data Protection Commissioner

Respondent

Hellen Shikanda

1st Interested Party

Nation Media Group Plc

2nd Interested Party

The Sacred Heart of Mukumu Girls School

3rd Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Application to Extend Time/orders Previously Granted

  1. 1 Whether the court should extend the 60-day period previously granted to the respondent to admit, investigate, and determine ODPC Complaint No. E0285 of 2025.
  2. 2 Whether the alleged prejudice to the interested parties barred extension of time.
  3. 3 Whether the court had jurisdiction to extend a period fixed by a prior judge in judicial review proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application had merit because the prejudice alleged by the interested parties was not demonstrated, the dispute was essentially between the ex parte applicants and the interested parties with the respondent acting as an umpire, and the court had jurisdiction to extend a period previously fixed by another judge. The 60-day period was therefore extended by 30 days and the matter was treated as exhausted.

Court Disposition

Application allowed

Orders

  • The period of 60 days previously granted by Aburili J. was extended by 30 days in terms of prayer 2 of the motion dated 3rd July 2026.
  • The instant file was ordered closed.