Skip to content
JudgmentDICKSON MIRERI GUTO VS THE SPEAKER NAIROBI CITY COUNTY ASSEMBLY AND NAIROBI CITY COUNTY ASSEMBLY AND 1 Others1 min read

DICKSON MIRERI GUTO VS THE SPEAKER NAIROBI CITY COUNTY ASSEMBLY AND NAIROBI CITY COUNTY ASSEMBLY AND 1 Others

High Court at Milimani High Court · · Jairus Ngaah

I have read the applicant's application dated 29 August 2023 sought to be admitted for hearing and disposal during this Honourable Court's  August/September recess by yet another application filed under a certificate of urgency of even date. It is apparent from the face of the application that  the proceedings for which an order of prohibition would be required took place today 30 August 2023. No explanation has been given why the applicant had to wait until the final day to file the application. To that extent, the application is as good as having been overtaken by events. For the same reason, an order for leave to operate as stay of deliberations that have occurred would not serve any useful purpose. The only plausible order that the applicant would be seeking once leave is granted is that of certiorari. Leave for a motion  for this particular order does not need to be granted under certificate of urgency. Nonetheless, leave is granted in terms of prayer 2. The substantive motion to be filed and served within seven days of the date of this ruling. The response, if any, to be filed and served within seven days of the date of service of the substantive motion. The motion shall be mentioned on 10 October 2023 for purposes of taking directions on the manner of its disposal. It is so ordered.

Details

Delivered
Court rank
High Court

Related decisions

Published for information only — not legal advice. Check the official record before relying on this text. Talk to an advocate