[2020] KEHC 5135 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 5135 (KLR)

The court found the application urgent due to the applicant's impending sentencing but noted that the decision being challenged was delivered nearly a year prior, raising questions about compliance with the six-month limitation period for certiorari. The court also observed that the applicant had not provided...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 5135 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: YSR; Respondent: The Kadhis Court Nairobi; Respondent: The Attorney General; Interested Party: FA
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review Application 110 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Application for Leave and Interim Orders
Outcome
Application certified as urgent; directions issued for inter partes hearing and further mention.
Judges
P Nyamweya
Legal Topics
Judicial Review Leave, Jurisdiction of Kadhis Court, Child Custody and Welfare, Certiorari and Prohibition, Time Limitations, Due Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Family and Children Administrative Law Judicial Review Leave Jurisdiction of Kadhis Court Child Custody and Welfare Certiorari and Prohibition Time Limitations +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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YSR

Applicant

The Kadhis Court Nairobi

Respondent

The Attorney General

Respondent

FA

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Application for Leave and Interim Orders

  1. 1 Whether leave to seek an order of certiorari can be granted in light of the time limitations set in Order 53 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the High Court as a judicial review court is the proper forum to challenge the Kadhi's Court's ruling on jurisdiction.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was denied due process in the proceedings before the Kadhi's Court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the application urgent due to the applicant's impending sentencing but noted that the decision being challenged was delivered nearly a year prior, raising questions about compliance with the six-month limitation period for certiorari. The court also observed that the applicant had not provided evidence of the alleged denial of due process. Consequently, the court certified the application as urgent and directed that the issues of time limitation and the appropriateness of judicial review as the forum for challenging the Kadhi's Court's jurisdiction be canvassed inter partes. The applicant was ordered to file a supplementary affidavit with certified proceedings, and all...

Court Disposition

Application certified as urgent; directions issued for inter partes hearing and further mention.

Orders

  • The Chamber Summons application dated 22nd May 2020 is certified as urgent and admitted for hearing on a priority basis.
  • The applicant shall file a supplementary affidavit annexing a certified copy of the Kadhi's Court proceedings within thirty (30) days.