Philip v City Loaf Ltd (Appeal E014 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2448 (KLR)

The court found that the State bears the evidential burden of demonstrating that an arrested person was produced before a court within 24 hours. The respondents produced no evidence establishing compliance with Article 49(1)(d). On the uncontroverted evidence of the petitioners, they were held for five and four days respectively before production in court. The court held that strict compliance with Article 49(1)(d) is required and that the prolonged detention constituted an unjustified violation of the petitioners' fundamental rights and freedoms.

The court reasoned that the petitioners were arrested and detained without lawful justification. Their detention was found to be wrongful and unlawful. The court held that the State, having failed to justify the arrest and detention, acted arbitrarily and in breach of the protection afforded by Article 29 of the Constitution.

The court found that the petitioners were confined in police cells without justification, which restricted their freedom of movement in breach of Article 39 of the Constitution.

The court held that the DPP is independent and does not direct or control the Kenya Police. The violations complained of occurred before the DPP became involved in the matter. Consequently, no liability could attach to the DPP in respect of the arrest and detention.

The court relied on the principle that an award of compensation is an appropriate and effective remedy for redress of an injustice. In exercising its discretion under Article 23(3), the court considered the nature of the violations, the duration of the unlawful detention and comparable awards, and settled on general damages of Kshs. 300,000 for each petitioner.