Scholastica Ngina Shiraku & another v Orange Democratic Movement & another [2017] KEMC 72 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused to let a nominated county assembly candidate join an election petition because joining is discretionary, not automatic.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicant satisfied the essentials for enjoinment in a petition
He did not; the application failed to conform to the laid-down principles
The court applied the elements set out in the Supreme Court's election jurisprudence - a personal interest that is clearly identifiable and proximate, prejudice on non-joinder, and intended submissions. Although the applicant showed membership of the 1st respondent and inclusion on a list for nomination under the youth representative category, he did not demonstrate compliance with the enjoinment principles or establish his case on a balance of probabilities.
Legal principles established
#- Enjoinment as an interested party is discretionary, not a right, and requires the applicant to show a clearly identifiable proximate personal interest or stake, the prejudice to be suffered on non-joinder, and the submissions intended to be made
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion application dated 15th September 2017 is dismissed in its entirety
- 2.Each party to bear its own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Scholastica Ngina Shiraku & another v Orange Democratic Movement & another [2017] KEMC 72 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Election Petition (application dated 15th September 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2017/72/eng@2017-11-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.