Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedJudicial Review Application dated 26 January 2024· [2024] KEELRC 1481 (KLR)

Republic v Clerk, County Assembly of Mombasa & 3 others; Khalid (Exparte Applicant) (Judicial Review Application E003 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 1481 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya (Judicial Review Division)
14 March 2024
2,327 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The High Court ordered Mombasa County officials to pay a former employee Kshs. 13.4 million within 21 days after they ignored his court-awarded compensation.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The ex parte applicant, Walid Khalid, sought an order of judicial review by way of mandamus compelling the Clerk of the County Assembly of Mombasa, the Chief Officer Finance, the County Secretary and the CEC Member for Finance of the County Government of Mombasa to satisfy a Certificate of Order against the Government dated 22 September 2023 for Kshs. 12,800,000 (decretal sum of Kshs. 8,000,000 plus interest of Kshs. 4,800,000) and a Certificate of Order for Costs dated 18 September 2023 for Kshs. 604,913.33, totalling Kshs. 13,404,913.33. The decree arose from a judgment of 26 July 2018 in Mombasa ELRC Petition No. 342 of 2014 awarding him damages for unlawful and unconstitutional removal from office; the Court of Appeal in Civil Appeal No. 155 of 2018 partially succeeded, upholding Kshs. 8,000,000 but setting aside Kshs. 4,000,000 for loss of income. Costs of the suit were taxed at Kshs. 604,913.33 on 4 November 2021. The respondents were served but neither attended nor responded. The court, relying on section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act and the Koroso authority, held that mandamus is the remedy to compel accounting officers to pay certified government debts and that such proceedings are not execution. The court entered judgment for the applicant, directing the respondents to satisfy both certificates within 21 days, with costs of the proceedings borne by the respondents.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether mandamus should issue to compel the respondents to satisfy the Certificates of Order against the Government

Holding

Mandamus issued unopposed; the applicant held valid Certificates of Order and the respondents, as accounting officers, had a statutory duty to pay under section 21(3) of the Government Proceedings Act.

Reasoning

The applicant had exhausted judicial process, obtaining a decree from the ELRC upheld by the Court of Appeal, and Certificates of Order against the Government dated 22 September and 18 September 2023. The respondents were served but neither attended nor responded. Section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act obliges the accounting officer to pay the certified amount with lawful interest. Mandamus is the means of compelling that statutory duty and safeguarding access to justice under Article 48. The court found the orders justified.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a decree-holder is barred from executing against the Government, mandamus is the only remedy to compel the accounting officer to satisfy the decree.
  • Mandamus proceedings against a public officer are not execution proceedings and do not render the officer personally liable.
  • Where a statutory duty is cast on a public officer in his official capacity and owed to the public, any person with sufficient legal interest may apply for mandamus to enforce it.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Judgment entered for the ex parte applicant against the respondents, who are directed to satisfy the Certificate of Order against the Government dated 22 September 2023 for Kshs. 12,800,000 comprising the Decree dated 26 July 2018 in Mombasa ELRC Petition No. 342 of 2014 and the Court of Appeal judgment dated 25 September 2020
  2. 2.The respondents are directed to satisfy the Certificate of Order for Costs against the Government dated 18 September 2023 for Kshs. 604,913.33 comprising the Certificate of Costs dated 4 November 2021
  3. 3.Payment to be made within 21 days of the judgment and order
  4. 4.Costs of the proceedings to be borne by the respondents

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Government Proceedings ActSection 21(1)
  • Government Proceedings ActSection 21(3)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 48
  • Constitution of KenyaArticles 10 and 201(d)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 129

Cases cited (2)

  • Republic v The Attorney General & Another ex parte James Alfred Koroso
  • Republic v Attorney General & another Ex-Parte the Standard Limited & Baraza Limited [2018] eKLR
    [2018] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Judicial review jurisdiction in respect of public officers' statutory duties (mandamus), anchored on the Government Proceedings Act and Articles 48, 10 and 201(d) of the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Republic v Clerk, County Assembly of Mombasa & 3 others; Khalid (Exparte Applicant) (Judicial Review Application E003 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 1481 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Judicial Review Application dated 26 January 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1481/eng@2024-03-14

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