Riang International Group Limited v Accounting Officer, Central Rift Valley Water Works Development Agency & another (Application 28 of 2021) [2021] KEPPARB 12 (KLR) (15 March 2021) (Decision)
- Court
- KEPPARB
- Case number
- 12
- Citation
- [2021] KEPPARB 12 (KLR)
- Decided
- 15 March 2021
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypePublic Procurement ReviewPostureApplication for ReviewCoramMativo
Holding
The Board's jurisdiction was not ousted by the termination letter, and the termination did not meet the threshold under section 63 of the Act.
Facts
The Central Rift Valley Water Works Development Agency terminated a tender for Last Mile Connectivity Works for Eldoret and Kakamega Towns Lot II. Riang International Group Limited challenged the termination.
Issues
- Whether the Board's jurisdiction was ousted by the termination letter.
- Whether the termination met the threshold under section 63 of the Public Procurement and Disposal Act, 2005.
Reasoning
The court held that the Board had the duty to question whether the termination met the threshold of section 63 of the Act, and that the Board's jurisdiction was not ousted by mere existence of a letter of termination.
Outcome
The Request for Review was struck out for want of jurisdiction.
Orders
- The Request for Review filed by the Applicant is struck out for want of jurisdiction.
- Each party shall bear its own costs in the Request for Review.
Authorities cited
Legislation (2)
- Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act No. 33 of 2015
- Public Procurement and Disposal Act, 2005
Cases cited (3)
- Republic v. Public Procurement Administrative Review Board & Another Ex parte Selex Sistemi Integrati (2008) eKLR
- Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application No. 142 of 2018, Republic v. Public Procurement and Administrative Review Board & Another ex parte Kenya Veterinary Vaccines Production Institute (2018) eKLR
- Republic v. Kenya National Highways Authority Ex Parte Adopt –A- Light Ltd (2018) 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…