.
2. This Court takes great exception on Advocates who seek to arrest decision making at the 11th hour and the Court scrutinizes such motions in isolating blatant abuse of the process of the court.
3. While Diligence is expected of All advocates and the indisposition by Mr Kevin Odhiambo cannot be in demonstration of diligence from the public office of the Respondent and the Deponent Advocate is not the only Advocate in the Respondent I am not persuaded that the Respondent was diligent in participating in these proceedings I am however persuaded that the Fair Administrative Action Act, 2015 eschews undue regard to procedural technicalities in judicial review applications in recognition that judicial review is a tool in defense of the Bill of Rights.
4. The requirement of a “reasonable opportunity to state one’s case” is an apparent codification of the common law rule of natural justice audi alteram which literally means hear the other side, and prohibits the condemnation of a person unheard. I am equally persuaded that the uniqueness of Judicial review proceedings are such that for substantive justice to be done, the public body whose administrative decision(s) is subject to judicial review ought to be heard in public interest.
5. Section 8 of the Fair Administrative Action Act, 2015 requires that judicial review applications must be determined within ninety (90) days of filing the application in this instance the Judicial Review Application was filed on the 8th December, 2023, leave was granted on the 12th March, 2024 and substantive motion filed on the 18th March, 2024. For all intent and purpose, this Application ought to have been determined by the 18th of June 2024 within three (3) months of the filing of the substantive motion. This matter can no longer be entertained and that no prejudice shall be occasioned by the Respondent if I allowed the same.
6. Owing to the foregoing and noting that the Respondent has raised a preliminary objection on jurisdiction, this court shall accommodate the Respondent, allow the Application on the following terms.
7. The court directs and Orders on the following terms;
i. THAT, The Application is accordingly certified as Urgent warranting immediate hearing and with dispensation of its service in the 1st instance;
ii. THAT, the Applicant (Respondent herein) Shall serve all filed motions upon the Ex-Parte Applicants within the next 24 hours and not later than close of business on the 19th September 2024;
iii. THAT, the Judgment scheduled for the 19th September 2024 is hereby arrested;
iv. THAT, the Applicant (Respondent herein) filed Grounds of Opposition and Notice of Preliminary Objection all evenly dated 16th September 2024 are duly admitted and deemed properly filed in Response to the Application dated 18th March, 2024.
v. THAT, the Applicant (Respondent herein) shall file and serve its written submissions (not exceeding five (5) pages) in canvasing its case, within the next three (3) days from the date of this ruling and not later than close of business on Monday the 23rd September 2024(Return of service to be filed)
vi. THAT, the Ex-Parte Applicants shall file and serve its Supplementary written submissions (not exceeding five (5) pages) in response to the Preliminary Objection, within the next Nine (9) days from the date of this ruling and not later than close of business on 27th September 2024(Return of service to be filed)
vii. This court shall concurrently consider Grounds of Opposition and Notice of Preliminary Objection all evenly dated 16th September 2024 together with the Application for Judicial Review together with the Ex-Parte Applicants written submissions dated 1st July, 2024.
viii. THAT, Judgment shall be delivered on the 3rd November 2024