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

Republic v Kenya Bureau of Standards & 4 others; Exparte United Millers Limited; Department of Health Services, Nakuru County (Interested Party) [2019] KEHC 11292 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 11292 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
11292
Citation
[2019] KEHC 11292 (KLR)
Decided
13 May 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureApplication for Certiorari, Prohibition and MandamusCoramMcRuer C., Mokgoro, Supreme Court Justice
Holding

The court finds that it has jurisdiction to hear the case and that the ex parte applicant has demonstrated grounds to warrant the court to grant the judicial review orders sought.

Facts

The ex parte applicant, United Millers Limited, seeks orders from the court to release 29,714 bags of sugar from the Kenya Bureau of Standards (1st Respondent) and to prevent the destruction of these bags.

Issues

  1. Whether the court has jurisdiction to hear the case.
  2. Whether the ex parte applicant has demonstrated grounds to warrant the court to grant the judicial review orders sought.

Reasoning

The court addresses the jurisdictional issue and finds that the ex parte applicant has not demonstrated exceptional circumstances to bypass the statutory dispute resolution mechanism. The court also considers the applicability of the doctrine of exhaustion of statutory provided dispute resolution mechanisms.

Outcome

The court grants the ex parte applicant's application for declaratory order, certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus.

Orders

  • A declaratory order that the 1st Respondent has infringed its rights under Article 47 of the Constitution and section 4 (1) of the Fair Administrative Action Act.
  • An order of certiorari quashing the 1st Respondent’s decision not to release 29,714 bags (50 Kg each) of sugar to the applicant and for the same to be destroyed in line with the Multi Agency Team release protocol.
  • An order of prohibition directed at the 1st to 5th Respondents restraining them from destroying the applicant’s 29,714 bags (50 Kg each) of sugar.
  • Mandamus directing the 1st Respondent to release the applicant’s 29,714 bags (50 Kg each) of sugar to the applicant.

Remedies

  • Declaratory order
  • Certiorari
  • Prohibition
  • Mandamus

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Fair Administrative Action Act, 2015
  • Standards Act, 2015
Cases cited (17)
  • Fleur Investments Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes & Another
  • Consolidated Bank of Kenya Limited v Arch Kamau Njendu t/a Gitutho Associates
  • Republic v Kenya Revenue Authority ex parte Interactive Gaming & Lotteries Limited
  • Republic v Principal Magistrate Lamu Magistrates Court & Another
  • Republic v The Commissioner of Lands, ex parte Lake Flowers Limited
  • Republic v Architectural Association of Kenya & 3 Others ex parte Paragon Ltd
  • Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. United States EPA
  • Administrative law in South Africa
  • Reviewing reasonableness: an appropriate standard for evaluating state action and inaction
  • Administrative Justice and its Availability
  • Principles of Australian Administrative Law
  • Prasad v Minister for Immigration
  • Taking stock after Li
  • VZ Construction (Pty) Ltd vs Makana Municipality & Others
  • Article 50 (1)
  • Constitutional Petition No. 205 of 2018- Mombasa
  • Cap 496, Laws of Kenya
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 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case