SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Muthoka v Kenya Medical Training College; Ethics and Anti- Corruption Commission (Intended Interested Party) (Constitutional Petition E018 of 2022) [2022] KEELRC 4089 (KLR) (4 April 2022) (Ruling)

[2022] KEELRC 4089 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
4089
Citation
[2022] KEELRC 4089 (KLR)
Decided
4 April 2022
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeConstitutional PetitionPostureRespondent seeks to enjoin the EACC as an interested partyCoramM MBARŨ
Holding

The EACC meets the test to be an interested party and will suffer prejudice if not joined as an interested party

Facts

Petitioner Miriam Muthoka was terminated from employment by Kenya Medical Training College (KMTC) due to investigations by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC). The EACC found that Muthoka was not qualified for the position and that the position did not exist at the time of her appointment.

Issues

  1. Whether the EACC has sufficient grounds to be an interested party and to be joined in the suit
  2. Whether the EACC will suffer prejudice if not joined as an interested party

Reasoning

The court applied the criteria set out in Francis Karioki Muruatetu & Another v Republic & 5 others Petition 15 as consolidated with 16 of 2013 [2016] eKLR to determine if the EACC has sufficient grounds to be an interested party. The EACC has a stake in the proceedings and would be affected by the court's decision.

Outcome

The EACC is ordered to be joined as an interested party

Orders

  • The EACC is ordered to be joined as an interested party

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission Act
  • Leadership and Integrity Act 2012
Cases cited (1)
  • Trusted Society of Human Rights Alliance v Mumo Matemu (2014) eKLR
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case