Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck Outnot stated in the judgment provided· [2024] KEELC 5986 (KLR)

Marsabit County Sakuye Community Council of Elders & 1007 others v Mining Corporation of Kenya through the Cabinet Secretary & 5 others (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case E007 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 5986 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya (Judicial Review)
19 September 2024
5,131 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~21 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Exparte Applicants, members of the Dabel/Sakuye community in Marsabit County, moved the court by Notice of Motion dated 9th November 2023 under Sections 8 and 9 of the Law Reform Act and Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking certiorari against the alleged failure of the Respondents to conduct public participation over mining activities, prohibition restraining the 1st, 2nd, 5th and 6th Respondents from issuing mining licences without public participation, and mandamus to stop mining activities in the Dabel/Sakuye area. The 1st, 3rd and 4th Respondents denied any mandate to issue licences and asserted no cause of action against them. The 2nd Respondent explained that the 5th Respondent had applied for consent to mine chromites and gold; that it had engaged the Applicants in a consultative meeting of 18th October 2023 and planned a site visit; and that no decision had been made, rendering the application premature. The court framed three issues: whether the judicial review threshold was met, whether the application had merit, and costs. It held that evidence cannot be introduced through submissions, that no decision existed to be quashed, that certiorari cannot issue against a private entity, that none of the Respondents sued had the legal mandate to issue mining licences (which lies with the Mineral Rights Board and Cabinet Secretary, who were not sued), and that no evidence showed ongoing mining by the parties before it. The application was struck out with each party bearing their own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the application meets the threshold for judicial review

Holding

It does not; no decision existed to be quashed, public participation was ongoing, and certiorari cannot issue against a private entity.

Reasoning

The court found the 2nd Respondent had taken steps towards public participation (a consultative meeting and a planned site visit) and had not made a decision on the 5th Respondent's consent application. Without a decision, certiorari is inapt, and the orders sought target parties without mandate over licensing. Complaints about how participation was conducted were not amenable to judicial review.

p. 10
02

Whether a cause of action exists against the 1st, 3rd and 4th Respondents

Holding

No cause of action was established against them.

Reasoning

The 1st Respondent (National Mining Corporation) has no statutory mandate to grant mining consents or licences and owns no land in the disputed area. No evidence demonstrated inaction by the 3rd Respondent, and evidence could not be introduced through submissions and social media reports.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • Evidence cannot be adduced through submissions.
  • Judicial review questions the decision-making process of public bodies, not the merits of decisions, and requires a decision to be challenged.
  • Courts do not issue orders in vain nor orders against parties not joined to a suit.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application is struck out
  2. 2.Each party to meet their respective costs of the suit
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 8 and 9 of the Law Reform Act; Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules; articles 62, 66, 67, 69, 70 and 71 of the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Marsabit County Sakuye Community Council of Elders & 1007 others v Mining Corporation of Kenya through the Cabinet Secretary & 5 others (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case E007 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 5986 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). not stated in the judgment provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/5986/eng@2024-09-19

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