Esuron v Turkana County Public Service Board & another (Judicial Review E001 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1260 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court ordered Turkana's Public Service Board to shortlist a county lawyer for the County Solicitor job, ruling his public-service years count as advocate experience.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Applicant merits the grant of the judicial review orders sought
- 2.Whether the 1st Respondent was justified in excluding unqualified applicants for the position
- 3.Whether the Applicant was qualified to be appointed in an acting capacity to warrant legitimate expectation on his part
- 4.Whether the Applicant is entitled to the prayers sought
- 5.Who bears the costs of the suit
Key legal issues
#Whether the requirement of 'at least five years' experience as an Advocate of the High Court' under section 17(2)(a) of the Office of the County Attorney Act requires continuous practicing certificates
The court held that experience as an advocate runs from admission and does not require practicing certificates; an officer in public employment is exempt under section 10 of the Advocates Act and thus deemed to be practising.
Section 17(2)(a) refers to experience as an advocate, not to practicing certificates. Section 2 defines an advocate by entry on the Roll, and section 10 entitles public officers to act as advocates without practicing certificates. The Applicant served as Legal Counsel in the County from 2016 and Principal Legal Counsel in the Office of the County Attorney from 2020, so his years of service count as experience. The Applicant therefore met the five-year threshold.
Scope of judicial review
The court, exercising judicial review, confined itself to the decision-making process and not the merits of the decision.
Relying on established authority, the court reiterated that judicial review examines whether the decision-maker had jurisdiction, observed fair hearing, and considered relevant matters; the court is not entitled to act as a court of appeal over the decider or substitute its view on the merits.
Legal principles established
#- Experience as an advocate does not necessarily mean that one must have a practicing certificate; a public officer acting as advocate without charging fees is exempt from taking out a practicing certificate and the years served count as experience as an advocate.
Court orders
#- 1.An order of mandamus to issue to compel the 1st Respondent to include the name of David Eyanae Esuron among the shortlisted candidates for the position of Solicitor for the County Government of Turkana and to conduct an interview for him objectively and without bias
- 2.The 1st Respondent shall pay the Applicant's costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction of the High Court under Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules / Fair Administrative Action Act; motion for order of mandamus
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In judicial review proceedings the court is not concerned with the merits of the case but with the decision-making process.
Experience as an advocate does not necessarily mean that one must have a practicing certificate.
I therefore allow the same and hereby grant an order of mandamus to issue to compel the 1st Respondent to include the name of David Eyanae Esuron, the Applicant, among the shortlisted candidates for the position of Solicitor for the County Government of Turkana and to conduct an interview for him objectively and without bias.
The 1st Respondents shall pay the Applicants costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment refers to the repealed Local Government Act in section 10(c) of the Advocates Act and construes it as the County Government Act, but inconsistently names it as 'County Government Act' and earlier as 'County Governments Act 2012'; the enactment name varies within the judgment.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Esuron v Turkana County Public Service Board & another (Judicial Review E001 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1260 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Judicial Review Application dated 3rd February 2025 (Originating Motion). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1260/eng@2025-04-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.