Republic v County Government of Bungoma & 12 others; Chief Officer Ministry of Lands & Housing, Bungoma County (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E001 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 1071 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court ordered Bungoma County officials to pay Kshs.593,648 in awarded legal costs, confirming individuals can force county governments to pay court judgments.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Scope and efficacy of mandamus
Mandamus is a command of extensive remedial nature issuing to a person or body required to perform a public duty, available where there is a specific legal right and no specific or equally convenient remedy.
The court adopted the principles in R v Kenya National Examination Council ex-parte Githinji drawing on Halsbury's Laws of England, and the eight-factor test in the Schon Noorani decision: a public legal duty owed to the applicants, a clear right, prior demand, reasonable time to comply, refusal or unreasonable delay, no other adequate remedy, practical value, no equitable bar, and balance of convenience favouring mandamus.
Statutory duty of the accounting officer under Section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act
Where a court order including costs is made against the Government, the Accounting Officer of the department concerned must pay the certified amount together with lawful interest, and no other execution or attachment lies.
Section 21(1) requires the proper officer to issue a certificate of the order after taxation of costs; Section 21(3) obliges the Accounting Officer to pay the certified amount with interest; Section 21(4) bars execution or attachment and individual liability. County Governments fall within 'Government' under Article 6 of the Constitution and the Government Proceedings Act, so the duty attaches to the County's accounting officer.
Whether the Respondent and Interested Party were under a duty to pay the decretal sums
Yes. The judgment and taxed certificate of costs were not disputed, the certificate had been served, and payment was refused, so the Respondent is jointly responsible with the Chief Officer for satisfaction of the decree.
Judgment with costs was entered in the Applicants' favour in Bungoma ELC Petition No. 5 of 2013; the bill of costs was taxed and the certificate served on the accounting officer, who refused or declined to settle. No response was filed despite service. The court therefore found a clear public legal duty breached to the detriment of the decree holders and granted mandamus with interest at 6% per annum.
Legal principles established
#- Execution proceedings against a Government or public authority can only be as against the accounting officer or chief officer, who is under a statutory duty to satisfy the judgment.
- An order of mandamus issues to compel performance of a public duty imposed by statute where the duty-holder, despite demand, has failed to perform it.
Court orders
#- 1.An order of mandamus to compel the County Government of Bungoma, and the Chief Officer, Ministry of Lands & Housing to pay to the ex-parte Applicants the sum of Kshs.593,648.3 being the taxed costs together with interest thereon at 6% per annum from 21st February, 2023 until payment in full
- 2.The ex-parte Applicants shall have the costs of the Notice of Motion dated 16/02/2024
- 3.Orders accordingly
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review (mandamus) under Order 29(3) of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 as read with Section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act, following leave granted on 31st October 2024
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v County Government of Bungoma & 12 others; Chief Officer Ministry of Lands & Housing, Bungoma County (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E001 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 1071 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Judicial Review (Notice of Motion dated 16th February 2025) – leave granted in Bungoma ELC Petition No. 5 of 2013 matter. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/1071/eng@2025-03-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.