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

David Ngige Tharau & 128 others v Principal Secretary Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development & 2 others [2016] KEHC 7274 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 7274 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
7274
Citation
[2016] KEHC 7274 (KLR)
Decided
6 January 2016
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeConstitutional PetitionPostureRespondent's Motion to DismissCoramLenaola, Majanja, Sachs
Holding

The court dismisses the petition with costs, finding that the petitioners have not set out with reasonable precision the issues they seek to address and that the project has been handled satisfactorily by the respondents.

Facts

Petitioners are residents of Kibera Soweto East Zone 'A' Housing project who were selected for the Kibera Slum Upgrading Project. They allege that the relocation process is opaque, corrupt, and lacks transparency, leading to their exclusion from benefiting from the project.

Issues

  1. Constitutional rights infringement
  2. Lack of transparency in relocation process
  3. Corruption in project implementation

Reasoning

The court considers the petitioners' allegations insufficiently detailed and cites Annarita Karimi Njeru vs. Attorney General (1979) KLR 154 for the principle that complaints must be set out with precision. The court also refers to Article 22(3) of the Constitution, which allows for informal documentation in proceedings related to the Bill of Rights.

Outcome

Dismissed with costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Constitution of Kenya 2010
  • Transitional and Consequential Provisions of the Constitution of Kenya
Cases cited (1)
  • Nairobi High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 596 of 2008 - Kenya Union of Savings and Credit Cooperatives (KUSCCO) Limited vs. Nairobi City Council (Now Nairobi City County)
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