Republic v Kirinyaga County Council & another Exparte Stephen Muriithi Njeru & another [2017] KEELC 1990 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court dismissed a judicial review bid because the applicants were really appealing a magistrate's decision while an appeal was already pending.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Scope of judicial review
Judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not the merits of the decision
The Court adopted the Court of Appeal's parameters in Municipal Council of Mombasa v Republic & Umoja Consultants, that a reviewing court examines whether the decision maker had jurisdiction, whether affected persons were heard, and whether relevant matters were considered. The Court should not act as a court of appeal over the decider by assessing the sufficiency of evidence.
Alternative remedies and discretion
Where an appeal is pending against the same decision, judicial review is not the efficacious remedy and the Court may refuse the orders sought
The applicants' grievances over the Magistrate's ruling in Kerugoya SPMMC No. 145 of 2012 were already the subject of a pending appeal (formerly HC Civil Appeal No. 19 of 2012, now ELCA No. 125 of 2013). Judicial review is a remedy of last resort, and the application in substance appealed the merits of the Magistrate's decision. Certiorari being discretionary, the Court declined to grant the orders.
Non-joinder of affected parties
The persons affected by the orders sought had not been made parties to the judicial review proceedings
The leave granted required service on all persons affected. The judicial review sought to impugn the ruling in Kerugoya SPMMC No. 145 of 2012, yet the plaintiffs and defendants in that suit were not made parties, even though the orders sought would affect them.
Legal principles established
#- Judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not the merits of the decision itself
- Judicial review is a remedy of last resort where alternative remedies exist
- Certiorari is a discretionary remedy which the Court may refuse even where grounds for its grant exist
- Where there is a clear procedure to address a particular grievance, it should be followed
Court orders
#- 1.The applicants' Notice of Motion dated 20th December 2012 and filed on the same day is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the 1st respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction of the High Court (orders of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus sought under the law of judicial review)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Kirinyaga County Council & another Exparte Stephen Muriithi Njeru & another [2017] KEELC 1990 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Judicial Review No 8 of 2012. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/1990/eng@2017-05-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.