Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment (Judicial Review notice of motion, Kisumu)· [2021] KEELC 4518 (KLR)

Republic v County Government of Kisumu Ex parte John Michael Obure [2021] KEELC 4518 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
28 January 2021
AOAntony Ombwayo
898 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The High Court in Kisumu suspended Kisumu County's massive property rates increase, ruling that the public must be consulted before such changes take effect.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is an ex parte-style leave application in judicial review brought by John Michael Obure under Order 53 rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Sections 1A and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act against the County Government of Kisumu. The applicant sought leave to apply for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus in respect of Gazette Notice No. 11063 of 24th December 2020, by which the respondent proposed to increase property rates in Kisumu County on the basis of its Draft Valuation Roll 2017, with increases of up to 7,275% on freehold land and 5,343% on leasehold land. The applicant contended the process violated the constitutional and statutory requirement of public participation under the Constitution, the Public Finance Management Act, the County Governments Act and the Kisumu County Public Participation Act, and that the exorbitant increases were unreasonable and oppressive, particularly amid the COVID-19 economic downturn. The respondent, through its counsel, filed grounds of opposition and argued that the draft valuation roll had been subjected to public scrutiny and would go to the valuation court; counsel also undertook that no member of the public would be barred from filing objections for non-payment of rates arrears. The court granted leave for the substantive judicial review orders and, invoking the mandatory nature of public participation, directed that the leave operate as a suspension of the gazette notice and a stay of all proceedings arising from it. Timelines for filing the substantive motion and pleadings were set, with highlighting on 24th February 2021 and costs in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the applicant raised sufficient grounds for leave to commence judicial review

Holding

Leave to apply for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus was granted in terms of the dated statement

Reasoning

The court considered the motion and found that the applicant had raised enough grounds, notably the alleged absence of public participation and the exorbitant proposed rate increases of up to 7,275% on freehold land and 5,343% on leasehold land, to justify leave for the substantive judicial review orders sought.

p. 2
02

Whether leave should operate as a stay and suspension of the gazette notice

Holding

Leave was directed to operate as suspension of the gazette notice and stay of processes arising from it

Reasoning

Although the respondent undertook that no member of the public would be barred from filing objections for non-payment of rates arrears, the court held that public participation is a constitutional requirement that cannot be wished away, and accordingly granted suspension and stay pending determination of the substantive judicial review application.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Public participation is a constitutional requirement that cannot be dispensed with in the preparation of a draft valuation roll

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Leave granted to the applicant to apply for orders of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus in terms of the statement dated 15th January 2021
  2. 2.Leave to operate as a suspension of Gazette Notice No. 11063 published on 24th December 2020 in the Kenya Gazette Vol. CXXII No. 235 and as a stay of all and any proceedings and processes arising therefrom pending hearing and determination of the judicial review application
  3. 3.Applicant to file and serve the substantive notice of motion within 3 days
  4. 4.Respondent to file a reply within 5 days of service
  5. 5.Applicant to file a supplementary affidavit with submissions within 5 days of service
  6. 6.Respondent to file submissions within 5 days of service
  7. 7.Highlighting on 24th February 2021

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010Order 53 rule 2
  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A and 3A
  • Constitution of Kenyapublic participation provisions (unspecified)
  • Public Finance Management Actunspecified
  • County Governments Actunspecified
  • Kisumu County Public Participation Actunspecified
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 53 rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 and Sections 1A and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 21

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Republic v County Government of Kisumu Ex parte John Michael Obure [2021] KEELC 4518 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment (Judicial Review notice of motion, Kisumu). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/4518/eng@2021-01-28

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.