[2013] KEHC 5226 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's case was, in substance, an appeal against the IEBC Tribunal's decision. Upon review, the court detected no error in the Tribunal's proceedings and was satisfied that the applicant had been given a sufficient opportunity to present his case. The court held that there was no...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 5226 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Steve Mutuku Mutua; Respondent: James Mutiso Mutua; Respondent: The National Alliance; Respondent: Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 39 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- DAS Majanja, CC Kipkorir, GV Odunga
- Legal Topics
- Party Nominations, Electoral Disputes, Judicial Review, Tribunal Appeals
- 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
Steve Mutuku Mutua
Applicant
James Mutiso Mutua
Respondent
The National Alliance
Respondent
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court should interfere with the decision of the IEBC Tribunal regarding party nominations for Yatta Constituency.
- 2 Whether the applicant was denied a fair hearing before the IEBC Tribunal.
- 3 Whether the nomination of the 1st respondent was marred by irregularities and fraud.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's case was, in substance, an appeal against the IEBC Tribunal's decision. Upon review, the court detected no error in the Tribunal's proceedings and was satisfied that the applicant had been given a sufficient opportunity to present his case. The court held that there was no justification to interfere with the Tribunal's findings or to grant the orders sought by the applicant. Consequently, the application was dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The Notice of Motion dated 1st February 2013 is dismissed.
- There shall be no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Nairobi (Nairobi Law Courts)
Miscellaneous Application 39 of 2013 [if !mso]> <style> v:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif][if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-ZA X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; text-align:justify; text-indent:-17. 85pt; line-height:200%; font-size:11. 0pt;"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]
STEVE MUTUKU MUTUA .............................................................................................APPLICANT
AND
JAMES MUTISO MUTUA..................................................................................1ST RESPONDENT
THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE..............................................................................2ND RESPONDENT
INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND BOUNDARIES COMMISSION.............3RD RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. On 1st February 2013, we dismissed the Notice of Motion filed on 1st February 2013 with no order as to costs. We now proffer our reasons for the decision.
2. The applicant who was a candidate for the position for the Member of the National Assembly for the Yatta Constituency TNA ticket seeks the following orders;
(a)That this honourable Court be pleased to certify the application herein as of utmost urgency and the same be heard on priority basis.
(b)That this Honourable Court be pleased to stay and or nullify the ruling delivered by the 3rd respondent in favour of the 1st and 2nd respondent on the 28th January 2013 until the hearing and determination of this application.
(c)That the 3rd respondent, its agents and or servants be restrained by way of injunction from accepting the nomination papers issued by the 2nd respondent from the 1st respondent until the final determination of this application.
(d)That the nomination of the 1st respondent by the 2nd respondent and subsequent certificate of nomination issued to the 1st respondent be cancelled and or nullified and be issued to the complainant in respect to Yatta Constituency so that the wish of the Yatta electorate will be upheld.
(e)That in the alternative the 2nd respondent be ordered to compensate the complainant both special and general damages by him and his supporters to be assessed by this Honourable Court.
(f)That the respondents be committed to meet the costs of the application.
3. The gravamen of his complaint is that the party primary held on 17th and 18th January 2013 was marred by irregularities and fraud and the 1st respondent was controversially announced winner whereupon he was issued with the party certificate.
4. The applicant complained before the IEBC Tribunal. His complaint is that he could not call all his evidence. The Tribunal heard the case and dismissed it on the ground that there was insufficient evidence. The applicant wishes this Court to rehear the case and reconsider the evidence.
5. We concluded that the applicant’s case is in the nature of an appeal. We have not detected any error in the Tribunal proceedings entitling us to interfere and we are satisfied that the applicant was given sufficient opportunity to present his case. In the circumstances, we dismissed the application.
DatedandDelivered at Nairobithis 5th February 2013
D.S. MAJANJA
JUDGE
W. KORIR
JUDGE
G. V. ODUNGA
JUDGE