Kenya Case Law

Accounting Officer, Kenyatta International Convention Centre & another v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board; Paramax Cleaning Services Limited & another (Interested Parties)

Accounting Officer, Kenyatta International Convention Centre & another v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board; Paramax Cleaning Services Limited & another (Interested Parties) [2025] KEHC 6031 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review Application E085 of 2025

Judge

RE Aburili

The court found that the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board acted within its statutory mandate under Section 173 of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act by annulling the original notification of award to the 2nd Interested Party and directing the issuance of a notification of award to the 1st Interested Party. The Board's decision was based on a factual finding that the 2nd Interested Party failed to comply with a mandatory requirement for a tender-specific NEMA 'No Objection' letter, while the 1st Interested Party had complied. The court held that the Board's powers incl…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement
• Judicial Review
• Tender Evaluation
• Administrative Action
• Statutory Powers

Republic v Kenya Wild Life Service; Ahmed (Exparte)

Republic v Kenya Wild Life Service; Ahmed (Exparte) [2025] KEHC 5837 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review Application E179 of 2024

Judge

RE Aburili

The High Court struck out a procurement judicial review application for lack of jurisdiction after the bidder failed to seek PPARB review within the statutory time limit.

• Public Procurement Disputes
• Judicial Review Jurisdiction
• Exhaustion Of Statutory Remedies
• Tender Evaluation
• Timeliness Of Review
• Doctrine Of Exhaustion

Vickers Security Services Limited v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board & 3 others

Vickers Security Services Limited v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board & 3 others [2025] KECA 671 (KLR)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal E143 of 2025

Judges

W Karanja, K M'Inoti, LA Achode

The Court of Appeal held that the Procurement Review Board breached fair hearing rights by deciding unpleaded issues without hearing the parties.

• Public Procurement Review
• Fair Hearing Rights
• Judicial Review Remedies
• Tender Evaluation
• Natural Justice
• Administrative Action

Republic v Public Procurement and Administrative Review Board & another; Accounting Officer Kenya Electricity Generating Company PLC & 5 others (Interested Parties); Joymaxc Enterprises (Exparte Applicant)

Republic v Public Procurement and Administrative Review Board & another; Accounting Officer Kenya Electricity Generating Company PLC & 5 others (Interested Parties); Joymaxc Enterprises (Exparte Applicant) [2025] KEHC 705 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review E283 of 2024

Judge

JM Chigiti

The High Court dismissed a judicial review challenge to a PPARB decision ordering re-evaluation of a KenGen tender, finding no illegality, irrationality, or procedural impropriety.

• Public Procurement
• Judicial Review Remedies
• Tender Evaluation
• Legitimate Expectation
• Ultra Vires
• Procedural Fairness

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board; Kenya Roads Board & 3 others (Interested Parties); Lavington Security Limited (Exparte Applicant)

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board; Kenya Roads Board & 3 others (Interested Parties); Lavington Security Limited (Exparte Applicant) [2024] KEHC 14897 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review Application E182 of 2024

Judge

JM Chigiti

The court found that the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board erred in law by striking out the applicant's request for review solely on the basis of absence of a board resolution authorizing the institution of proceedings. The court held that while authorization to sue is necessary for a company, the absence of a filed resolution at the time of filing is not fatal and can be ratified or regularized subsequently. The court relied on precedent establishing that procedural technicalities should not override substantive justice, and that the proper course is to allow ratification rather…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement
• Locus Standi
• Judicial Review Remedies
• Company Law Authority
• Tender Evaluation
• Procedural Fairness

Republic v National Government Constituencies Fund Board & another; Kingsway Business Systems Limited (Exparte)

Republic v National Government Constituencies Fund Board & another; Kingsway Business Systems Limited (Exparte) [2024] KEHC 10409 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Application E155 of 2024

Judge

J Ngaah

The court held that the applicant was required by law to first seek administrative review before the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board under section 167(1) of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, and only after exhausting that process could it approach the High Court for judicial review. The applicant received notification of the non-award on 28 June 2024, which triggered the statutory period for review, but failed to file a request for review within the available time. The applicant also failed to apply for exemption from the exhaustion requirement under section 9(4) o…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement
• Judicial Review Procedure
• Exhaustion Of Remedies
• Tender Evaluation
• Mandatory Requirements
• Administrative Action

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board & another; Iansoft Technologies Limited (Interested Party); Green Com Enterprise Solutions Limited (Exparte)

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board & another; Iansoft Technologies Limited (Interested Party); Green Com Enterprise Solutions Limited (Exparte) [2024] KEHC 10081 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Application E148 of 2024

Judge

J Ngaah

The High Court found that the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board's decision to order a fresh technical evaluation of all tenders, including those whose disqualification was uncontested, was irrational and unreasonable. The Board's own findings confirmed that only one tenderer (the applicant) met the technical criteria, and the other disqualified tenderers did not object to their exclusion. Subjecting all to a fresh evaluation, therefore, served no logical purpose and defied reasonableness. Furthermore, the Board's order mandating due diligence was ultra vires, as section 83(1) of…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Review
• Judicial Review Remedies
• Procedural Fairness
• Irrationality And Illegality
• Tender Evaluation
• Natural Justice

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board & 2 others; Mfi Document Solutions Limited (Interested Party); Mal-Mart Enterprises Limited (Exparte)

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board & 2 others; Mfi Document Solutions Limited (Interested Party); Mal-Mart Enterprises Limited (Exparte) [2024] KEHC 9582 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Application E072 of 2024

Judge

J Ngaah

The High Court dismissed a judicial review challenge to a procurement review decision, holding that failure to plead loss or damage in the review request was fatal.

• Public Procurement
• Judicial Review Standards
• Tender Evaluation
• Administrative Review
• Pleading Requirements
• Public-procurement

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board; Accounting Officer, Kenya Electricity Generating Company & 2 others (Interested Parties); Pinro Empire Limited (Exparte)

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board; Accounting Officer, Kenya Electricity Generating Company & 2 others (Interested Parties); Pinro Empire Limited (Exparte) [2024] KEHC 6634 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Miscellaneous Application E053 of 2024

Judge

J Ngaah

The High Court dismissed a judicial review challenge to a procurement review board decision, holding that the dispute was really an appeal on the merits.

• Public Procurement Review
• Judicial Review Scope
• Tender Evaluation
• Administrative Decision Process
• Public-procurement
• Judicial-review

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board; Chief Executive Officer, Sacco Society Regulatory Authority & 2 others (Interested Parties); Nash EQ INC (Exparte)

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board; Chief Executive Officer, Sacco Society Regulatory Authority & 2 others (Interested Parties); Nash EQ INC (Exparte) [2024] KEHC 5107 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Application E069 of 2024

Judge

J Ngaah

The court held that the respondent (Public Procurement Administrative Review Board) properly evaluated the evidence and applied the law to the facts in upholding the disqualification of the applicant's tender. The respondent found that the applicant's tender security did not meet the mandatory requirement of being valid for 150 days from the tender opening date, and this non-compliance rendered the tender unresponsive at the preliminary evaluation stage. Although the irregularity was detected at the due diligence stage, the court found that the evaluation committee was entitled to verify docu…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement
• Judicial Review Standards
• Tender Evaluation
• Due Diligence Requirements
• Statutory Interpretation
• Remedies In Public Law