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

Gor Mahia Football Club v Kenya Premier League Limited [2016] KESDT 5 (KLR)

[2016] KESDT 5 (KLR) KESDT
Read PDF
Court
KESDT
Case number
5
Citation
[2016] KESDT 5 (KLR)
Decided
30 August 2016
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppeal from a decision of the Independent Disciplinary Appeals Committee (IDAC) of the Football Kenya FederationCoramJohn M Ohaga, E Gichuru Kiplagat, Mary N Kimani
Holding

The preliminary issue is determined in favor of the Club, as IDAC did not notify the Club that the reasoned decision could be made available upon request.

Facts

The Kenya Premier League Limited (KPL) charged Gor Mahia Football Club with failing to control its members and supporters during a league match on April 16, 2016, resulting in disruptions and assault of a second assistant referee. The Club was docked three points from its points tally. Additionally, the KPL charged Mr. Boniface Oluoch, the Club's goalkeeper, with assaulting the second assistant referee.

Issues

  1. Whether the decision to dock three points from the Club's points tally complied with the principles of legality and proportionality.
  2. Whether the disciplinary measure taken against Mr. Boniface Oluoch was valid.

Reasoning

The Tribunal determined that the Club's preliminary issue was not faulted because IDAC did not notify the Club that the reasoned decision could be made available upon request. The standard of proof to be applied in disciplinary proceedings is the 'comfortable satisfaction' of the Panel.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Sports Act, 2013
  • Rules of Kenyan Football
  • Companies Act, Chapter 486
Cases cited (2)
  • FC Zenit St. Petersburg v. Russian Football Union (Award of 7 October 2013)
  • Deportivo Petare FC v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) (award of 21 March 2014)
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