Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedJudicial Review Miscellaneous Application dated 24th September 2024 (Nakuru)· [2025] KEELRC 573 (KLR)

Republic v Executive Committee Member (CECM) Finance, County Government of Nakuru & 3 others; Langi (Exparte Applicant) (Judicial Review E009 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 573 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya (Judicial Review)
26 February 2025
AMAnna Ngibuini Mwaure
1,627 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The High Court ordered Nakuru County Government to pay a work injury award of Kshs.2.3 million with interest after it failed to settle a court judgment.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The ex-parte Applicant, Moses Ouma Langi, obtained judgment against the County Government of Nakuru in Nakuru ELRC Miscellaneous Application No. E038 of 2022 for damages arising from a work injury. Despite being served with the Certificate of Order and a demand notice, the Respondents failed to pay the decretal sum of Kshs.2,335,838.09. Because Section 21(4) of the Government Proceedings Act prohibits execution or attachment against government, the Applicant moved the court by Notice of Motion dated 24th September 2024 seeking an order of mandamus compelling the Respondents to pay the decretal amount with interest at 14% per annum from 15th May 2024, plus costs. The Respondents opposed, asserting they did not refuse to settle but needed funds from the National Treasury pending the Division of Revenue (Amendment) Bill 2024, and claimed the sum was factored into the 2024/2025 budget. The Respondents did not file submissions. The court framed one issue: whether the application was merited. Relying on the Court of Appeal's exposition of mandamus in the Kenya National Examinations Council case and the decisions in Ex-parte Simon Wainaina Mwaura and Ex-parte Herman Marine Nderi, the court found the certificate of order had been served, no compliance had followed, and the Respondents offered no proof the sum was actually budgeted nor any timeline for payment. The court allowed the application, granted mandamus compelling payment of the decretal sum with interest at 14% per annum from 15th May 2024 until payment in full, and awarded the Applicant costs of the application. Judgment delivered virtually at Nakuru on 26th February 2025 by Anna Ngibuini Mwaure, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether mandamus should issue to compel the Respondents to pay the decretal sum

Holding

The application was merited; the certificate of order was served, no compliance followed, and the Respondents gave no proof the decretal sum was budgeted, so mandamus issued.

Reasoning

The court reiterated the scope of mandamus from the Kenya National Examinations Council case: it commands performance of a public duty where there is a specific legal right and no specific legal remedy. Section 21(4) of the Government Proceedings Act bars execution against government, leaving mandamus as the means to enforce payment. The Applicant served the certificate of order and demanded payment; the Respondents' assertion that the sum was factored into the 2024/2025 budget was unsubstantiated and they were silent on when payment would be made. Mandamus was therefore the appropriate remedy.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Mandamus lies to compel an accounting officer to satisfy a certificate of order against government where payment has been demanded and refused

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Application dated 24th September 2024 allowed
  2. 2.Order of mandamus compelling the Respondents to pay Kshs.2,335,838.09 with interest at 14% per annum from 15th May 2024 until payment in full
  3. 3.Ex-parte Applicant to have costs of the application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Government Proceedings ActSection 21(4), Section 21
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159(2)(d), Article 48
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 21 Rule 1
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 1B
  • Division of Revenue (Amendment) Bill 2024

Cases cited (5)

  • Republic V County Government of Kitui Ex-parte Fairplain Systems Limited
    [2022] eKLR
  • Seventeenth Enterprises Limited V Cabinet Secretary for Ministry of Interior and Coordinate of National Government & 2 others
    [2015] eKLR
  • Republic V Principal Secretary & Another Ex-parte Herman Marine Nderi
    [2014] eKLR
  • Republic V Attorney General & Another Ex-parte Simon Wainaina Mwaura
    [2013] eKLR
  • Kenya National Examination Council V Republic, Ex-Parte Geofirey Gathenji Njoroge & 9 Others
    [1997] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Order of mandamus in judicial review pursuant to Section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act, Cap 40

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Republic v Executive Committee Member (CECM) Finance, County Government of Nakuru & 3 others; Langi (Exparte Applicant) (Judicial Review E009 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 573 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application dated 24th September 2024 (Nakuru). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/573/eng@2025-02-26

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