Onguti v Council of Legal Education (Judicial Review E192 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 8569 (KLR) (Judicial Review) (18 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 8569 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI LAW COURTS) JUDICIAL REVIEW JUDICIAL REVIEW E192 OF 2026 NM ORINA, J JUNE 18, 2026 BETWEEN ERICK MOTARI ONGUTI .................................................................... APPLICANT AND COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION ................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. I have considered the certificate of urgency, the ex parte chamber summons, the statutory statement and the verifying affidavit, all dated 15 June 2026, together with the annextures. The Applicant acknowledges that he unsuccessfully pursued this claim before the Legal Education Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal). This court has established that the matter in dispute being the alleged revision or alteration of the ex parte Applicant’s marks for ATP 108 – Commercial Transactions – from 58 to 48 was the subject of Legal Education Appeal No. E027 of 2023 where the Tribunal rendered a determination dismissing the Applicant’s claim. (See, Ong’uti v Council for Legal Education; Kenya School of Law (Interested Party) [2023] KELEAT 648 (KLR)). 2. Pursuant to Section 38(1) of the Legal Education Act, the proper recourse was for the Applicant to prefer an appeal against the decision of the Tribunal. Consequently, this court is not satisfied that the Applicant has established basis for grant of leave to apply for judicial review. The application is an abuse of the court process and the same is hereby dismissed. DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2026 NABIL M. ORINA JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8569/eng@2026-06-18 1
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.