Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNotice of Motion dated 5/2/2025 (arising from Kitale High Court Petition No. 14 of 2013)· [2025] KEELC 4674 (KLR)

Kokwo Multi-Purpose Co-operative Society v Principal Secretary Ministry of Land, Housing and Urban Development & another (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case 1B of 2024) [2025] KEELC 4674 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
18 June 2025
1,251 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ordered a government ministry to pay a Kshs 7.9 million decree within 30 days or its accounting officer risks arrest.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The exparte applicant moved the court by Notice of Motion dated 5/2/2025 seeking an order of mandamus compelling the respondents to satisfy a decree of Kshs.7,896,644/= with interest at 14% per annum from May 2006, issued in Kitale High Court Petition No. 14 of 2013 on 1/10/2015. The applicant showed that a decree dated 19/10/2015 was served on and acknowledged by the respondents in 2015, and that a certificate of order against the Government dated 25/8/2023 was served on the Permanent Secretary on 31/8/2023. The respondents opposed through grounds of opposition, contending there was no evidence they refused to satisfy the certificate of order. The court confirmed jurisdiction under Section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act, and relying on the Gathenji and Mwandihi line of authorities, held that compliance with Section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act is the condition precedent to execution against the Government, and that service of the certificate of order crystallises the accounting officer's statutory duty to pay. Finding no evidence that the decree had been reviewed, set aside or vacated, and no explanation from the respondents for a decade of non-compliance, the court found the reliefs merited. A further affidavit filed without leave was excluded. The court ordered the Accounting Officer of the 1st respondent to satisfy the decree within 30 days, in default of which a warrant of arrest would issue, with costs to the exparte applicant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Compliance with Section 21 Government Proceedings Act as precondition to mandamus

Holding

The applicant complied: the decree was served and acknowledged in 2015, and the certificate of order dated 25/8/2023 was received by the Permanent Secretary on 31/8/2023, invoking the statutory duty to pay.

Reasoning

Section 21(1) requires service of a certificate of order on the accounting officer before execution against the Government. The court found annexures showed service and acknowledgment of both the decree and the certificate of order. The respondents offered no explanation for the non-payment, and the decree had not been reviewed, set aside or vacated. The duty to pay crystallised upon service of the certificate.

p. 3
02

Whether mandamus should issue to compel settlement of the decree

Holding

Yes. The respondents had not honoured a lawful decree for 10 years with no justification, so the reliefs sought were merited.

Reasoning

The court noted no dispute that judgment was delivered on 1/10/2015 ordering a refund of Kshs.7,896,644/= with 14% interest from 2006, and a decree issued. There was no evidence of the decree being set aside. The respondents did not explain the decade-long non-compliance, and alternative dispute resolution had not resolved the matter, leaving mandamus as the remaining remedy.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Service of the certificate of order on the accounting officer under Section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act is the condition precedent that crystallises the statutory duty to satisfy a decree against the Government.
  • Mandamus lies to compel performance of a statutory duty owed to a party with a legal right to expect its performance.
  • A decree or order may expire by effluxion of time, which is 12 years.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order of mandamus compelling the Accounting Officer of the 1st respondent to satisfy the decree or certificate of order of Kshs.7,896,644/= with interest at 14% per annum from May 2006 within 30 days from the date of the judgment
  2. 2.In default of satisfaction within 30 days, a warrant of arrest to issue
  3. 3.Costs to the exparte applicant

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Environment and Land Court ActSection 13(7)
  • Government Proceedings ActSection 21(1), 21(2), 21(3)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 29 Rule 3

Cases cited (8)

  • Republic -vs- County Government of Nairobi & Other; Exparte Kingpost Ltd
    [2021] eKLR
  • Kenya National Examination Council -vs- Republic; Exparte Geofirey Gathenji Njoroge & 9 others
    [1997] KECA 58 (KLR)
  • Joseph Muriithi Nyaga -vs- Embu County Government
    [2021] eKLR
  • Mirigo & Others -vs- Ministry of Lands & 4 Others
    Civil Appeal 277 of 2011 [2014] KECA 881 (KLR)
  • Republic -vs- Attorney General & Another; Exparte James Alfred Koroso
    Nairobi HC JR Misc. Application No. 44 of 2012
  • Republic -vs- Permanent Secretary Office Of The President Ministry Of Internal Security & another; Ex-Parte Nassir Mwandihi
    [2014] KEHC 6027 (KLR)
  • Republic -vs- Permanent Secretary Ministry of State for Provincial Administration & Internal Security exparte Fredrick Manoah Egunza
    Nairobi HC Misc. Appl. No. 13 of 2012
  • Otinga -vs- Cabinet Secretary Ministry of Education & Others
    (Civil Appeal E525 of 2023) [2025] KECA 460 (KLR)
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act (prerogative reliefs)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kokwo Multi-Purpose Co-operative Society v Principal Secretary Ministry of Land, Housing and Urban Development & another (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case 1B of 2024) [2025] KEELC 4674 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Notice of Motion dated 5/2/2025 (arising from Kitale High Court Petition No. 14 of 2013). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4674/eng@2025-06-18

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