[2004] KEHC 806 (KLR)
The court declined to grant an ex-parte injunction because the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence, such as the FIFA Constitution or Rules, to support their claim that the Committee was unlawfully constituted. The court found that, in the absence of such evidence, it could not conclude that the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KEHC 806 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Salim H. Sumra; Plaintiff: Ismail Mohamed; Plaintiff: Mohamed Omar; Defendant: Kipchoge Keino; Defendant: Silvester Ashioya; Defendant: Charles Nyaberi; Defendant: Kadir Farah
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 266 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Ex Parte Injunction Application
- Outcome
- ex-parte injunction declined; application to proceed to inter-partes hearing
- Legal Topics
- Interlocutory Injunctions, Arbitration Referral, Sports Governance, Association Constitutions
- 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
Salim H. Sumra
Plaintiff
Ismail Mohamed
Plaintiff
Mohamed Omar
Plaintiff
Kipchoge Keino
Defendant
Silvester Ashioya
Defendant
Charles Nyaberi
Defendant
Kadir Farah
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Ex Parte Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendants should be restrained by injunction from conducting branch elections pending arbitration.
- 2 Whether the FIFA/KFF Normalisation Committee was lawfully constituted under the KFF Constitution.
- 3 Whether the plaintiffs have established a prima facie case for the grant of an ex-parte injunction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court declined to grant an ex-parte injunction because the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence, such as the FIFA Constitution or Rules, to support their claim that the Committee was unlawfully constituted. The court found that, in the absence of such evidence, it could not conclude that the Committee's actions were illegal or that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case for the grant of an injunction. The matter was therefore set down for inter-partes hearing to allow the defendants an opportunity to be heard.
Court Disposition
ex-parte injunction declined; application to proceed to inter-partes hearing
Orders
- The application for ex-parte injunction is declined.
- The application shall be served upon the defendants for inter-partes hearing within 14 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA
CIVIL SUIT NO. 266 OF 2004
1. SALIM H. SUMRA
2. ISMAIL MOHAMED
3. MOHAMED OMAR Suing as Officials of Kenya
Football Federation Coast Branch ……………………………. PLAINTIFFS
- Versus -
KIPCHOGE KEINO …………………………………….…..... 1ST DEFENDANT
SILVESTER ASHIOYA ……………………………………… 2ND DEFENDANT
CHARLES NYABERI ………………………………………... 3RD DEFENDANT
KADIR FARAH …………………………………………….… 4TH DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
The plaintiffs are officials of the Kenya Football Federation Coast Branch. They have sued the first and second defendants as Chairman and Secretary respectively of the FIFA/KFF Normalisation Committee (the Committee) which was formed vide an agreement between FIFA, the world soccer governing body and, according to the plaintiffs, the former officials of the Kenya Football Federation, National Office. The third and fourth defendants are the Returning Officers appointed by the Committee to conduct the elections of the Kenya Football Federation South Coast Branch and Kenya Football Federation North Coast Branch respectively.
The plaintiffs’ complaint, as stated in their plaint, is that having conducted the Branch elections on 1st February 2004 the Committee has no authority to order fresh elections in the Branch and that they have raised a complaint in that regard under the KFF Constitution and the matter has been referred to arbitration. They therefore seek an injunction to restrain the defendants from conducting branch elections scheduled for the 4th December 2004 until the arbitral process is complete. In the affidavit in support of the plaintiffs’ application for injunction the legality of the Committee is challenged on the ground that it was appointed by “strangers and that such Committee [is] not provided for in the KFF Constitution.” Counsel for the plaintiff also argued the KFF Constitution has no provision for affiliation of the Kenya Football Federation to FIFA.
My understanding of the plaintiffs’ complaint is that FIFA has no powers to control football activities in Kenya. If that be so one then wonders how FIFA came to ban Kenya from participating in the world cup qualifying matches. Further more the Applicants have not exhibited a copy of the FIFA Constitution or Rules. In the absence of that I am not in a position to say that ex facie the appointment of the Committee is illegal and grant an injunction restraining it from carrying out its mandate. I therefore decline to grant any ex-parte orders at this stage before hearing the defendants and order that the application should be served for inter-parte hearing within 14 days.
DATED and delivered this 2nd day of December 2004.
D.K. Maraga
Ag. JUDGE