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

On the Mark Security Limited v Accounting Officer, Kenya Revenue Authority & another (Application 158 of 2020) [2021] KEPPARB 5 (KLR) (14 January 2021) (Decision)

[2021] KEPPARB 5 (KLR) KEPPARB
Read PDF
Court
KEPPARB
Case number
5
Citation
[2021] KEPPARB 5 (KLR)
Decided
14 January 2021
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureApplication for ReviewCoramArch. Steven Oundo, Dr. Joseph Gitari, Mr. Alfred Keriolale
Holding

The Board finds that the Procuring Entity was neither objective nor fair in its conduct of the due diligence exercise.

Facts

On the Mark Security Limited submitted a bid for a tender for the supply and delivery of K9 dogs and training of dog handlers. The Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) conducted due diligence on the bidder, which included a site visit and interviews with the bidder's referees. The KRA found that the bidder's performance during its previous contract was below par and did not provide satisfactory references.

Issues

  1. Board's jurisdiction to entertain the Request for Review
  2. Due diligence conducted by KRA

Reasoning

The Board determined that the Procuring Entity should have raised issues directly with the bidder during the pendency of its previous contract and should have documented communications with the bidder.

Outcome

The Board cancels the Letter of Intention to Award and the Letter of Notification of Unsuccessful Bid, and directs KRA to proceed with the procurement process.

Orders

  • Letter of Intention to Award to M/s Skaga Limited to be cancelled
  • Letter of Notification of Unsuccessful Bid to the Applicant to be cancelled
  • KRA to proceed with procurement process within 14 days

Remedies

  • Cancellation of Letters of Intention and Notification
  • Direction to proceed with procurement process

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act (No. 33 of 2015)
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