Skip to content
JudgmentFREDRICK BIKERI VS State Law AND ODPP AND 2 Others1 min read

FREDRICK BIKERI VS State Law AND ODPP AND 2 Others

High Court at Milimani High Court · · Jairus Ngaah

I have read the applicant's application dated 25 April 2024 filed under  a certificate of urgency of even date. I am satisfied that the application is urgent and it is so certified. The applicant is granted leave to file a substantive motion for judicial review reliefs in terms of prayers 1 a), b), c) and d) of the chamber summons. As for the prayer for leave to operate as stay, it would appear that the prayer has been overtaken by events. According to the impugned notice the public participation exercise which the stay would have served to halt, was ending today 26 April 2024; this is the date on which the present application was brought to my attention. If the notice was published on 9 April 2024 as the applicant has stated in his application, no reason has been given as to why the applicant had to initiate these proceedings at the 11th hour, so to speak. In these circumstances the order for leave to operate as stay would not serve any useful purpose.

However, in order to expedite the hearing and determination of the main motion, I direct that the motion be filed and served within 7 days of today's date. The respondents and interested party are directed to file and serve their response to the motion within 7 days of the date of service of the applicant's motion. Upon service of the respondents' and interested party's response, the applicant will file and serve his submissions within 7 days. On their part, the respondents and interested party will file and serve their submissions within 7 days after the been served with the applicant's submissions. Highlighting of submissions shall be on 28 May 2024. It is so ordered.
    FREDRICK BIKERI VS State Law AND ODPP AND 2 Others FREDRICK BIKERI VS State Law AND ODPP AND 2 Others