Arthur Wamiti Njoroge v The Disciplinary Tribunal & another [2017] KEHC 8906 (KLR)
- Court
- High Court of Kenya
- Case number
- 8906
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 8906 (KLR)
- Decided
- 12 June 2017
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeConstitutional PetitionPostureRespondent Responded to PetitionCoramIL, Oputa, SCN, Viscount Reading
Holding
The decision is quashed and an injunction is granted to stop implementation of the decision.
Facts
Petitioner is an advocate of the High Court of Kenya. A complaint was lodged against him by the interested party with the Law Society of Kenya. The petitioner was not notified of the complaint and was not served or summoned to attend the hearing.
Issues
- Petitioner's constitutional right not to be condemned unheard
- Violation of rules of natural justice
Reasoning
The court found that the petitioner was not notified of the complaint and was not served or summoned to attend the hearing, which violated his constitutional right not to be condemned unheard.
Outcome
Petition granted
Orders
- Quash the decision of the Disciplinary Tribunal
- Grant an injunction to stop implementation of the decision
Remedies
- Quash the decision of the Disciplinary Tribunal
- Grant an injunction to stop implementation of the decision
Authorities cited
Legislation (3)
- Article 22 (1) & 3 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kenya 2010
- Article 2 (1), 3, 19 & 165 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kenya
- Media Act Cap 411 B of the Laws of Kenya
Cases cited (9)
- John M. Mativo, Judge
- Brinks-Mat Ltd vs Elcombe
- Agnes Muthoni Nyanjui & 2 Others vs Annah Nyambura Kioi & 3 Others
- Public Drug Co V Breyerke cream Co
- Jadesimi V Okotie Eboh
- Republic v Attorney General & 4 others ex-parte Diamond Hashim Lalji and Ahmed Hasham Lalji
- John Wachiuri T/A Githakwa Graceland & Wandumbi Bar & 50 Others vs The County Government of Nyeri & Ano JR No 17 B of 2015
- Pastoli vs Kabale District Local Government Council and Others
- Justice Langa in Minister of Safety & Security v Luiters
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.
Loading judgment…