Republic v County Executive Committee Member Finance & Economic Affairs, Nairobi City County & 2 others; Associates (Ex parte Applicant) (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E091 of 2021) [2026] KEELC 3521 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ordered a county government to pay a court judgment debt immediately, warning officials could face contempt charges if they delay.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Compliance with Section 21(3) of the Government Proceedings Act
The applicant complied: judgment was entered on 30th April 2024, a decree and certificate of order against the county government dated 13th June 2025 were issued and served on the respondents, and the sum remains unpaid.
The court found service of the decree and certificate of order against the county government undisputed. Despite service and reminders, the decretal sum of Kshs.590,249.76/- remained unpaid. This satisfied the statutory preconditions under Section 21(3), which imposes a duty on the accounting officer to pay upon certification and service, without conditioning payment on budgetary allocation.
Entitlement to mandamus against the respondents
Mandamus issued to compel the respondents to pay the decretal sum, with contempt consequences in default.
Relying on the Gathenji principles, mandamus compels performance of a public duty imposed by statute. Section 21(4) protects government property from execution, so the sole remedy for a money decree against government is mandamus against the accounting officer. Since the certificate was served and the duty was not performed, the court found merit in the motion and issued the order sought, plus costs.
Legal principles established
#- Once a certificate of order against the government is served, Section 21(3) of the Government Proceedings Act imposes a statutory duty on the accounting officer to pay the sums specified, and payment is not conditioned on budgetary allocation.
- Decrees against government can only be enforced by mandamus compelling the accounting officer, as government enjoys immunity from execution and attachment under Section 21(4) of the Government Proceedings Act.
Court orders
#- 1.An order of mandamus compelling the respondents to pay to the ex-parte applicant forthwith and without delay the decretal sum of Kshs.590,249.76/-
- 2.In default, notice to show cause to issue against the respondents to show cause why they should not be cited for contempt of court orders
- 3.The ex-parte applicant awarded costs of the motion
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 53 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules (judicial review, pursuant to leave granted on 1st August 2025)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v County Executive Committee Member Finance & Economic Affairs, Nairobi City County & 2 others; Associates (Ex parte Applicant) (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E091 of 2021) [2026] KEELC 3521 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELC Misc. No. E091 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3521/eng@2026-06-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.