Republic v Chief Officer in Charge of Finance County Government of Kericho & 2 others; Omari Kefa p/a E.M Orina Advocates (Exparte Applicant) (Environment and Land Case Judicial Review Application E004 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 3799 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court ordered Kericho County to pay an advocate KShs 1.55 million in certified legal costs, confirming mandamus as the only way to enforce money decrees against government.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether mandamus should issue to compel payment of taxed costs against the county government
Yes. The Applicant held a certificate of costs and a certificate of order for costs against the government, served them on the Respondents, and payment was refused, satisfying the statutory duty threshold for mandamus.
The court applied the established test that mandamus lies to compel performance of a public statutory duty. The Applicant demonstrated a taxed advocate-client bill, a certificate of costs for Kshs. 1,553,612/=, a certificate of order against the government, service of both by letter dated 25th June 2024 (received 9th July 2024), and continued non-payment. Under Section 21(3) of the Government Proceedings Act, the accounting officer is under a statutory duty to pay, which mandamus enforces since execution against government property is barred.
Whether a notice to show cause for contempt could issue at this stage
No - the prayer was premature because there was no evidence of service and disobedience of a court order or contempt proceedings.
The Applicant sought a notice to show cause in default of payment within fourteen days. Following the Miriam Wairimu Wambugu decision, the court held such a prayer premature absent evidence that a court order had been served and disobeyed and contempt proceedings instituted. Mandamus had not previously issued, so there was no order capable of being breached.
Legal principles established
#- A decree for money or costs against the Government can only be enforced by way of an order of mandamus compelling the accounting officer to pay, the Government being immune from execution and attachment under Section 21(4) of the Government Proceedings Act
- Once a certificate of order against the Government is served, Section 21(3) imposes a statutory duty on the accounting officer to pay the certified sums plus interest, and payment is not conditioned on budgetary allocation or parliamentary approval
Court orders
#- 1.An order of mandamus compelling the Respondents to pay the Ex parte Applicant Kshs. 1,553,612/= being the certified costs awarded in Kericho ELC Misc Application No. E004 of 2024, together with interest from 23rd April 2024 (date of taxation) until payment in full
- 2.The Ex parte Applicant shall have costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 8 and 9 of the Law Reform Act and Order 53 Rule 3(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Chief Officer in Charge of Finance County Government of Kericho & 2 others; Omari Kefa p/a E.M Orina Advocates (Exparte Applicant) (Environment and Land Case Judicial Review Application E004 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 3799 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Kericho High Court Miscellaneous Application No. E006 of 2024 (judicial review, Notice of Motion dated 31st July 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/3799/eng@2025-05-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.