Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

To Apply For An Order of & 7 others v The Attorney General (in a representative capacity For and on behalf of the Commissioner of Police, the Provincial Criminal Investigation Officer, The Provincial Police Officer and the District Criminal Investigation Officer) & 1 other

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 471 OF 2005 IN THE MATTER OF: ORDER LIII RULE 1(1), (2), (3), (4) & 2 OF THE CPC. SECTION 8 OF THE LAW REFORM ACT, CAP 8 LAWS OF KENYA AND SECTION 3A OF THE CPA IN THE MATTER OF: APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 75 (2) (a) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA SECTION 24 OF THE SALE OF GOODS ACT CHAPTER 31 OF THE LAWS OF KENYA AND IN THE MATTER OF: MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION NUMBER KAT 930D NISSAN HOMMY AND IN THE MATTER OF: AN APPLICATION BY SAVION MTEPE NDUNE SEEKING LEAVE TO APPLY FOR AN ORDER OF PROHIBITION AND MANDAMUS DIRECTED AGAINST THE DISTRICT CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION OFFICER (URBAN POLICE STATION MOMBASA) THROUGH COMMISSIONER OF POLICE THE REPUBLIC Versus THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (in a representative capacity For and on behalf of the Commissioner of Police, the Provincial Criminal Investigation Officer, The Provincial Police Officer and the District Criminal Investigation Officer) ……… RESPONDENT EX-PARTE

page 1 of 3

SAVION MTEPE NDUNE...........................APPLICANT AND 1. ROSE N. OKEMWA 2. GEORGE SIKUKU MASIKA 3. JAMES SERENGO 4. GLOBAL LINK MOTORS CO. LTD. …………………………… AFFECTED PARTY RULING The Ex-Parte Applicant’s application in this matter is not clear. In his chamber summons dated 20th June 2005 he seeks three main orders in the following terms:“(a) THAT, the Applicant herein be granted leave to apply for ORDERS OF MANDAMUS and PROHIBITION by way of JUDICIAL REVIEW to move into this Honourable court for purposes of quashing, reviewing and evaluate the decision of the D.C.I.O. URNAB POLICE through the Commissioner of Police, in impounding and/or detaining motor vehicle Registration No. KAT 930D at URBAN POLICE STATION MOMBASA (b) THAT, in event of leave being granted, a direction be made that such leave do operate as a stay of any further dealings in the said Motor Vehicle KAT 930D and the said Motor Vehicle be retained at such place as the court may direct pending hearing and determination of the application for JUDICIAL REVIEW and/or until further orders from this Honourable Court. (c) THAT, the Respondent be prohibited from releasing or in any other way dealing with Motor Vehicle Registration No. KAT 930D NISSAN HOMMY to the detriment of the Applicant the said Motor Vehicle Registration No. KAT 930D to the 1st Affected party until further orders of this Honourable Court.” There are other orders sought like leave to serve the 2nd, 3rd and 4th affected persons through advertisement in newspapers and that if the said motor vehicle is released the same to be returned and kept at Urban Police Station. Four grounds are stated in the application itself as the basis upon which the application is brought. In the accompanying statement six grounds are stated. A perusal of all those grounds, however, shows that the application is based on the ground that the police have impounded the Ex-parte Applicant’s motor vehicle registration number KAT 930D on allegations of theft. The order of mandamus sought in paragraph (a) issues to compel the performance of a public duty which is imposed on a person or body of persons by a statute which that person or body of persons has failed to perform to the detriment of a party who has a legal right to expect the duty to be performed. It does not issue to quash, review or evaluate any decision as prayed in this application. Prohibition issues to prohibit the performance of a proposed act in excess of jurisdiction or in contravention of the law of the land. It cannot issue to quash or to rectify a wrongful act as prayed herein. In the circumstances this application is fatally defective and the same is hereby struck out. DATED and delivered this 22nd day of June 2005.

page 2 of 3

D.K. MARAGA JUDGE

page 3 of 3

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.