Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedJudicial Review Application (Nakuru High Court), arising from ELRC Petition No.10 of 2015· [2018] KEELRC 163 (KLR)

Republic v Baringo County Public Service Board ExParte Zipporah Mwangi & 32 others [2018] KEELRC 163 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
8 November 2018
MMM. Mbaru
1,138 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

#

The High Court in Nakuru refused to order a county board to pay Ksh.2.6 million in legal costs because the same request had already been decided in an earlier case.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The ex-parte applicants, who had succeeded in ELRC Petition No.10 of 2015 (employment on permanent and pensionable terms with effect from 1st July 2015, plus costs), applied for an order of mandamus compelling the respondents to pay Ksh.2,592,970.00 being costs taxed on 11th October 2016 and certified on 20th October 2016. The respondent, a statutory body managing county public service, opposed the application on three grounds: prematurity for lack of written authorisation; res judicata in view of Nakuru JR No.4 of 2017, where identical mandamus orders were declined on 8th December 2017 and a decree issued on 19th December 2017 without appeal; and section 103 of the Public Finance Management Act, 2012, which vests payment powers in other statutory bodies. The court held that the present application is a replica of JR No.4 of 2017, in which a final order was made between the same parties on the same cause of action. Adopting the Njagua decision, it held that fresh proceedings on a concluded matter, absent appellate challenge, constitute an abuse of court process and an impermissible attempt by the court to sit on appeal over its own decision. The application was dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Res judicata in judicial review

Holding

The mandamus application is res judicata and an abuse of process because it replicates Nakuru JR No.4 of 2017, in which a final order was issued and not challenged

Reasoning

The court found the present application a replica of JR No.4 of 2017, involving the same parties, same cause of action and substantially similar orders. A final order exists in that matter, decreed on 19th December 2017 and neither appealed nor reviewed. Reviving the issue through a fresh application would contravene section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act and amount to the court sitting on appeal over a concluded dispute, which its jurisdiction does not permit.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a final decision has been made and not upset on appeal, bringing fresh proceedings on the same matter is an abuse of court process
  • Res judicata principles apply to judicial review proceedings
  • A court cannot sit on appeal over its own concluded decision by entertaining a fresh similar application

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application by the ex parte applicants is found without merit and dismissed
  2. 2.Costs awarded to the 1st respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Actsection 7
  • Public Finance Management Actsection 103

Cases cited (3)

  • Republic versus Permanent Secretary, Ministry of State for Provincial Administration and Internal Security ex-parte Fredrick Manoah Egunza
    [2012] eKLR
  • Charles Kanyi Njagua versus Nairobi County Government & another
    Nairobi JR No.27 of 2018
  • Njenga Mwangi Wachira & Partners versus County Secretary, City County of Nairobi
    [2017] eKLR, Nairobi JR No.176 of 2015
Jurisdiction invoked
Judicial review jurisdiction of the High Court (mandamus); res judicata under section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Republic v Baringo County Public Service Board ExParte Zipporah Mwangi & 32 others [2018] KEELRC 163 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Judicial Review Application (Nakuru High Court), arising from ELRC Petition No.10 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/163/eng@2018-11-08

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