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

Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board; Ex Parte Managing Director, Kenya Ports Authority & another; Jalaram Industrial Suppliers Limited (Interested Party) [2019] KEHC 6166 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 6166 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
6166
Citation
[2019] KEHC 6166 (KLR)
Decided
28 June 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureAppeal from a decision of the Public Procurement Administrative Review BoardCoramAzangalala, Lenaola, Mativo, Ogola
Holding

The decision of the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board is quashed, and the Ex Parte Applicants are ordered to pay costs.

Facts

Jalaram Industrial Suppliers Limited participated in a tender for the supply of medical and welding gases, welding rods, and accessories. Their bid was unsuccessful, leading to dissatisfaction and the filing of an application for review.

Issues

  1. The validity of the decision of the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board
  2. The procedural fairness of the tender process

Reasoning

The court found the decision of the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board to be procedurally flawed and in violation of the Constitution and relevant statutes.

Outcome

Judgment in favor of the Ex Parte Applicants

Orders

  • An order of certiorari to remove the decision of the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board to this court and to quash it

Remedies

  • The Ex Parte Applicants shall have costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (4)
  • Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act No. 33 of 2015
  • Law Reform Act Cap 26
  • Fair Administrative Action Act No. 4 of 2015
  • Constitution of Kenya 2010
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