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

Republic v Inspector General of Police & another Ex-parte Felix Muthemba & another (suing as on their own behalf and as officials of Balozy Welfare Group) [2016] KEHC 8118 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 8118 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
8118
Citation
[2016] KEHC 8118 (KLR)
Decided
7 October 2016
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureEx parte application for orders of certiorari and prohibitionCoramThe presiding judge
Holding

The court quashed the respondents' decision to evict the applicants and prohibited the respondents from evicting, demolishing houses, arresting, harassing, intimidating, compelling the attendance of, charging, interrogating, prosecuting, and instituting criminal proceedings against the applicants.

Facts

The applicants, Felix Muthemba and Joseph Njuguna, are members of Balozy Welfare Group, which has been living on and using all that parcel of land known as LR No. 8529/1 for the last twenty years. They seek orders to quash the respondents' decision to evict them and to prohibit the respondents from evicting, demolishing houses, arresting, harassing, intimidating, compelling the attendance of, charging, interrogating, prosecuting, and instituting criminal proceedings against them.

Issues

  1. Quashing the respondents' decision to evict the applicants
  2. Prohibiting the respondents from evicting, demolishing houses, arresting, harassing, intimidating, compelling the attendance of, charging, interrogating, prosecuting, and instituting criminal proceedings against the applicants

Reasoning

The court held that the applicants' case was a matter of grave public concern and that judicial review is a constitutional supervision of public authorities involving a challenge to the legal and procedural validity of the decision. The court found that the respondents' decision to evict the applicants was not in accordance with the law and that the respondents had abused their authority.

Outcome

The court quashed the respondents' decision to evict the applicants and prohibited the respondents from evicting, demolishing houses, arresting, harassing, intimidating, compelling the attendance of, charging, interrogating, prosecuting, and instituting criminal proceedings against the applicants.

Orders

  • Order of certiorari to quash the respondents' decision to evict the applicants
  • Order of prohibition prohibiting the respondents from evicting, demolishing houses, arresting, harassing, intimidating, compelling the attendance of, charging, interrogating, prosecuting, and instituting criminal proceedings against the applicants
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