Republic (Ex Parte Miller and Company Advocates) v County Government of Mombasa & 5 others
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court ordered Mombasa County's Finance CECM to pay a law firm Kshs 880,624 plus 14% interest, confirming mandamus can compel county payment of judgment debts.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the respondents were properly served
Service on the County Attorney (5th respondent) constituted sufficient service on all respondents.
The County Attorney, established under the Mombasa County Office of the County Attorney Act 2017, is the principal legal adviser responsible for advising all county departments and agencies. The applicant emailed the court order and certificate of order against the government to that office and served the leave and mandamus applications on it, demonstrating service of the demand for settlement.
Whether mandamus should issue against the respondents
Mandamus issued against the 2nd respondent only; the claim against the other respondents was dismissed.
The 1st respondent was clearly indebted, there was no pending appeal, the certificate of order against the government was served, and the respondents made no effort to settle and were not prepared to do so without a coercive order. The applicant had no other adequate remedy since it cannot execute against the government. However, the specific statutory duty of payment falls on the 2nd respondent, so no order should issue against the others.
Who shall bear the costs of the application
Each party to bear its own costs because the applicant succeeded against only one of six respondents.
Although costs follow the event under the proviso to Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, and a successful party should ordinarily be awarded costs, the applicant succeeded against only one of the six respondents, so no costs were awarded to it.
Legal principles established
#- Mandamus lies to compel a public authority to perform a public legal duty where there is a clear right, a prior demand, refusal or unreasonable delay, and no other adequate remedy.
- Service on the County Attorney suffices as service on the county government and its officers, as the County Attorney advises all county departments and agencies.
Court orders
#- 1.An order of mandamus issued directed to the 2nd respondent, namely, the County Executive Committee Member for County Finance and Economic Planning, to pay the ex parte applicant Kshs 880,624.16 together with interest of 14% per annum from 22.01.2025.
- 2.The claim against the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th respondents is dismissed.
- 3.Each party shall bear its own costs.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court (leave granted for order of mandamus)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic (Ex Parte Miller and Company Advocates) v County Government of Mombasa & 5 others", Case Analysis (2026). ELC Judicial Review No. E010 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5776/eng@2026-09-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.