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

Public v Public Procurement & Disposal Administrative Review Board & 4 others Ex-Parte J. Knieriem BV [2016] KEHC 1256 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 1256 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
1256
Citation
[2016] KEHC 1256 (KLR)
Decided
2 December 2016
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureEx-parte application for leave to commence judicial review proceedingsCoramRD
Holding

The ex parte applicant's application for leave to commence judicial review proceedings was timely, and the decision of the Public Procurement and Disposal Administrative Review Board is final and binding on the parties.

Facts

The ex parte applicant participated in two tenders for motorized vehicle number plate blanks and hot stamping foil. The Public Procurement and Disposal Administrative Review Board (1st Respondent) annulled the award to Hoffman International GmbH and directed the Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government (2nd Respondent) to award the tenders to Tropical Technology Limited and J. Knieriem BV respectively.

Issues

  1. Whether the ex parte applicant's application for leave to commence judicial review proceedings was timely.
  2. Whether the decision of the Public Procurement and Disposal Administrative Review Board is final and binding on the parties.

Reasoning

The court found that the ex parte applicant's application was timely because the date of the decision was excluded from the reckoning of time under section 57 of the Interpretation and General Provisions Act, Cap 2. The court also found that the decision of the Public Procurement and Disposal Administrative Review Board is final and binding on the parties.

Outcome

The ex parte applicant's application for leave to commence judicial review proceedings was granted.

Orders

  • Order of certiorari to quash the 1st Respondent's decision.
  • Order of prohibition restraining the 1st and 2nd Respondents from implementing or enforcing the said decision.
  • Order of mandamus compelling the 2nd Respondent to award the tenders to the ex parte applicant.

Remedies

  • Quashing of the 1st Respondent's decision.
  • Prohibition of the 1st and 2nd Respondents from implementing or enforcing the said decision.
  • Compelling the 2nd Respondent to award the tenders to the ex parte applicant.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Public Procurement and Disposal Act 2015
  • Interpretation and General Provisions Act, Cap 2
Cases cited (1)
  • Lotta vs. Tanaki [2003] 2 EA 556
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