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

Digital Luxury Travellers Ltd v National Transport and Safety Authority [2019] KETLABT 87 (KLR)

[2019] KETLABT 87 (KLR) KETLABT
Read PDF
Court
KETLABT
Case number
87
Citation
[2019] KETLABT 87 (KLR)
Decided
23 August 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppeal from the decision of the National Transport and Safety AuthorityCoramDick Waweru, Betty Chepng'etich Bii, Aden Noor Ali
Holding

The Transport Licensing Appeals Board finds that the Respondent's decision declining the Appellant's application to use the Odeon Stage/CBD Latema Road as its terminus was unlawful.

Facts

The Appellant, Digital Luxury Travellers Ltd, is a cooperative society licensed by the National Transport and Safety Authority (NTSA) to operate public service vehicles. The Appellant appealed against the NTSA's decision not to extend its route to Odeon Stage/CBD Latema Road.

Issues

  1. discriminatory nature of the decision
  2. breach of the Appellant's legitimate expectations on fairness & equality
  3. irrationality of the decision
  4. denial of the Appellant's right to natural justice

Reasoning

The Appellant appealed against the NTSA's decision, arguing it was discriminatory, irrational, and denied the Appellant its right to natural justice. The Board agreed with these arguments.

Outcome

The Appellant's appeal was successful.

Orders

  • The Respondent's decision is set aside.
  • The Respondent is compelled to issue Road Service Licences (RSLs) to the Appellant's vehicles with Odeon Stage/CBD Latema Road as a terminus within seven days of this order.
  • The order is to be served upon the Respondent, the Odeon Stage/CBD Latema Road Terminus Enforcement Officer, and the Traffic Commandant.

Remedies

  • Setting aside the Respondent's decision.
  • Issuance of RSLs with Odeon Stage/CBD Latema Road as a terminus.
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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case