IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS JUDICIAL REVIEW DIVISION MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPL. NO. 385 OF 2013 BETWEEN REPUBLIC ............………………………….…………………….. APPLICANT AND COUNCIL FOR LEGAL EDUCATION ........................... 1ST RESPONDENT KENYA SCHOOL OF LAW …………………………….… 2ND RESPONDENT THE DIRECTOR, KENYA SCHOOL OF LAW …………………………………..……. 3RD RESPONDENT ATTORNEY GENERAL ………………………………….. 4TH RESPONDENT EXPARTE GREGORY ODHIAMBO NDEGE NAANYU LETIPILA DUNCAN TAALAM KIMUTAI FELIX MOMANYI MANOTI RULING 1. The Notice of Motion dated 11th November 2013 sought orders of judicial review to quash the decision of the 1st and 2nd respondents denying the applicants direct admission to the Kenya School of Law or barring them from writing the pre-bar examination. 2. When the matter came up for directions, counsel for the applicants admitted that the applicants has sat the pre-bar examination and passed. He asks the court to adjourn the matter pending further action by the 1st and 2nd respondents regarding admission.
page 1 of 2
3. Counsel for the 1st and 2nd respondents submits that the matter is now spent as the basis for the grant of leave and the Motion has been dealt with and the issue of admission of the applicants is a separate consideration under section 16 and Schedule 2 of the Kenya School of Law Act, 2012. 4. I am satisfied that the subject matter of the application has been dealt with by the 1 st and 2nd respondent as the applicants have sat for and passed the pre-bar examination. Under Schedule 2 of the Kenya School of Law Act, 2012, they are entitled to apply for and be considered for admission to the Kenya School of Law. The consideration and decision, whether or not they are admitted, is a separate matter and constitutes a separate cause of action. 5. In the circumstances, the Notice of Motion dated 11 th December 2013 lacks substratum. It is dismissed with no order as to costs. DATED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 28th day of January 2014 D.S. MAJANJA JUDGE
page 2 of 2