[2008] KEHC 1972 (KLR)

[2008] KEHC 1972 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient interest and raised issues that require investigation, thus establishing a prima facie arguable case. Leave to commence judicial review proceedings was therefore granted. However, the court declined to grant a stay of the dismissal, reasoning that it...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] KEHC 1972 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Richard Orina Mogire; Respondent: Commissioner of Police; Respondent: The Attorney General
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 311 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Leave to Commence Judicial Review Proceedings
Outcome
leave granted to file judicial review; stay declined
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Fair Hearing, Public Service Dismissal, Certiorari, Mandamus, Prohibition
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Employment and Labour Judicial Review Fair Hearing Public Service Dismissal Certiorari Mandamus Prohibition

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Orina Mogire

Applicant

Commissioner of Police

Respondent

The Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Leave to Commence Judicial Review Proceedings

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was afforded a fair hearing before dismissal from the police force.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient interest and an arguable case to warrant leave for judicial review.
  3. 3 Whether leave, if granted, should operate as a stay of the dismissal and stoppage of salary.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient interest and raised issues that require investigation, thus establishing a prima facie arguable case. Leave to commence judicial review proceedings was therefore granted. However, the court declined to grant a stay of the dismissal, reasoning that it would not be in the interest of justice to stay a dismissal that had already been effected and communicated. The court emphasized that the issues raised could only be properly canvassed once the respondents are served and have an opportunity to respond in the main motion.

Court Disposition

leave granted to file judicial review; stay declined

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the applicant to file Judicial Review proceedings for certiorari, mandamus and prohibition within 21 days.
  • Stay orders are declined.