Republic v Betting Control and Licensing Board Ex Parte Advanced Gaming Limited [2019] KEHC 9546 (KLR)
- Court
- High Court of Kenya
- Case number
- 9546
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 9546 (KLR)
- Decided
- 27 February 2019
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureApplication for Certiorari and ProhibitionCoramP. NYAMWEYA
Holding
The Court found that the Respondent did not provide the Applicant with an opportunity to be heard before making its decision, and that the Respondent acted unreasonably.
Facts
The Applicant, Advanced Gaming Limited, is a bookmaker licenced by the Betting Control and Licensing Board. The Board suspended the Applicant's valid bookmakers licence on September 27, 2018.
Issues
- Whether the Respondent denied the Applicant an opportunity to be heard before making its decision.
- Whether the Respondent acted unreasonably.
- Whether the Applicant is entitled to the orders sought.
Reasoning
The Court held that the Respondent's decision was procedurally unfair and violated the Applicant's right to be heard and to fair administrative action.
Outcome
The Court granted the Applicant's application for orders of Certiorari and Prohibition.
Orders
- To quash the Respondent's decision to suspend the Applicant's bookmakers licence.
- To prohibit the Respondent from enforcing the suspension of the Applicant's licence or interfering with the Applicant's lawful operations.
- To award the Applicant's costs of the Notice of Motion.
Remedies
- To quash the Respondent's decision to suspend the Applicant's bookmakers licence.
- To prohibit the Respondent from enforcing the suspension of the Applicant's licence or interfering with the Applicant's lawful operations.
Authorities cited
Legislation (3)
- Betting, Lotteries and Gaming Act
- Fair Administrative Action Act 2015
- Constitution of Kenya
Cases cited (1)
- Republic vs National Transport & Safety & 2 others Ex-parte Rengcom Communications Ltd (2017) eKLR
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…