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

Republic v Electoral Commission of Kenya Ex- Parte Kimani Wa Nyoike & 3 others [2004] KEHC 2619 (KLR)

[2004] KEHC 2619 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
2619
Citation
[2004] KEHC 2619 (KLR)
Decided
23 April 2004
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureApplicant vs Respondent (Electoral Commission of Kenya) Ex-parte Kimani Wa Nyoike & 3 othersCoramJ.B.OJWANG, AG. JUDGE
Holding

The court quashed the Electoral Commission's decision and ordered it to forward Kimani Wa Nyoike's name for appointment.

Facts

The applicant, Kimani Wa Nyoike, sought a judicial review of the Electoral Commission of Kenya's decision to nominate Kipkalya Kiprono Kones as the party's nominee for the first applicant's nominated Member of Parliament seat.

Issues

  1. Nomination of Kipkalya Kiprono Kones as the party's nominee
  2. Interpretation of the Constitution

Reasoning

The court found the Electoral Commission's decision to be in violation of the Constitution and the law.

Outcome

Judgment in favor of the applicant, Kimani Wa Nyoike, and against the Electoral Commission of Kenya.

Orders

  • Certiorari to remove and quash the Electoral Commission's decision
  • Mandamus to direct the respondent to comply with the Constitution and general law
  • Certified copy of the judgment to be provided to the Speaker of the National Assembly
  • Applicants to be at liberty to make further applications
  • Costs to be borne by the respondent

Remedies

  • Quashing of the Electoral Commission's decision
  • Compliance with the Constitution and general law

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Constitution of Kenya
  • Civil Procedure Act
  • Law Reform Act
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