[2022] KEELRC 1283 (KLR)

[2022] KEELRC 1283 (KLR)

The court found that the petitioners failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they were lawfully in office at the time the new officials were appointed. The court relied on the presumption of legality of duly gazetted appointments and held that the petitioner's appointment was incomplete and invalid due to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELRC 1283 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Michael Mbanya Wathigo; Respondent: Nairobi City County Government; Respondent: Acting Governor, Nairobi City County Government; Respondent: Government Printer; Respondent: Attorney General
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 021 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
petition dismissed with costs
Judges
MN Nduma
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practice, Appointment and Removal of Public Officers, Fair Administrative Action, Gazettement Requirements
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Administrative Law Unfair Labour Practice Appointment and Removal of Public Officers Fair Administrative Action Gazettement Requirements

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

Parties

Michael Mbanya Wathigo

Applicant

Nairobi City County Government

Respondent

Acting Governor, Nairobi City County Government

Respondent

Government Printer

Respondent

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the appointment of new members to the Nairobi City County Alcoholic Drinks Control and Licensing Board was lawful and in accordance with the relevant statute.
  2. 2 Whether the petitioner and named individuals were lawfully in office at the time of the new appointments.
  3. 3 Whether the failure to gazette the petitioner's name invalidated his appointment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the petitioners failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they were lawfully in office at the time the new officials were appointed. The court relied on the presumption of legality of duly gazetted appointments and held that the petitioner's appointment was incomplete and invalid due to lack of gazettement. The court further determined that the respondents acted within their statutory mandate in appointing new members, and there was no evidence of unlawful removal or unfair labour practice. Consequently, the petition lacked merit and was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

petition dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The petition is dismissed with costs to the respondents.