JudgmentEvans Ogutu Ouma VS County Assembly Of Migori AND Migori County Assembly Service Board
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtClaim/Causes
…He submits further that Article 176 of the Constitution defines County Governments to constitute both County Assembly and County Executive. 8. Mr.…
…It is his submission that County Assembly Service Board is not part of the County Executive, and hence County Assembly employees need not submit to the PSC. 16.…
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtJudicial Review
…E077 of 2022 between Siaya County Assembly Service Board & 2 others - Vs- Isaac Felix Olwero delivered on 21st July 2023 held at paragraph 31 that; "I would propose that the appeal be allowed, and so as to remove further…
…The Applicants/Respondents further aver that the removal from office of the Ex Parte Applicant as the Clerk Siaya County Assembly is a process under Section 23 of the County Assembly Services Act, 2017, which process is ongoing…
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtJudicial Review
…OF KISII COUNTY AND IN THE MATTER OF SECTIONS 3(g), (h), (l) AND (n), 4(3) AND (4) OF THE PETITION TO COUNTY ASSEMBLIES (PROCEDURE) ACT NO. 15 OF 2020 AND IN THE MATTER OF STANDING ORDERS NOS 195(3),(4) AND (5), 198(e),(f…
…COUNTY ASSEMBLY 1st RESPONDENT SPEAKER, KISII COUNTY ASSEMBLY 2nd RESPONDENT KISII COUNTY ASSEMBLY 3rd RESPONDENT GOVERNOR, KISII COUNTY GOVERNMENT 4th RESPONDENT AND BENSON MOCHAMA ATIKA INTERESTED PARTY AND NANCY NYANGANYI…
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtJudicial Review
…Assembly. 25.…
…to remove office properties and records after the County Assembly had voted to remove them from office and so there was need to secure the same. 44.…
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtJudicial Review
…The Clerk presented the Petition to the Speaker of the County Assembly (the Speaker) and on 8 March 2023, the Speaker placed the Petition before the County Assembly. 4.…
…The case for the Clerk and County Assembly 35.…
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
…Section 13(1) of the County Government Act provides that there shall be a clerk of the County Assembly, appointed by the County Assembly Service Board with the approval of the County Assembly.…
…Assembly shall be approved by the County Assembly.…
Division and case type: High Court Commercial and TaxCommercial Arbitration
…COUNTY ASSEMBLY………………… RESPONDENT/APPLICANT RULING Brief Facts 1.…
…The respondent further argued that while the applicant had amended its pleadings to join the Kakamega County Assembly Board as suing on behalf of Kakamega County Assembly, no directions had been issued to include the new…
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
…all due procedure was followed, the decision of the county assembly is final. 28.…
…County Assemblies unless they act unconstitutionally.…
Division and case type: High Court Judicial ReviewJudicial Review
Division and case type: High Court Judicial ReviewJudicial Review
Division and case type: High Court Judicial ReviewJudicial Review Miscellaneous
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court dismissed the Petitioner's application for urgent relief seeking to stay the effect of a show cause letter issued to them by the Respondents. The Petitioner claimed the Respondents had disobeyed a status quo order from July 5, 2022, but the court found that the status quo orders were no longer live as the underlying application was already determined on October 6, 2022. The court held that the Respondents did not commit contempt because the orders in question were not active, and the show cause letter issued on October 6, 2023, was not subject to the prior orders. The application was dismissed with costs to the Respondents.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The Employment and Labour Relations Court in Kisumu determined that the Applicant’s motion for leave to amend the petition was dismissed. The Applicant sought to amend the petition to address inadvertent defects, erroneous figures, and typographical errors, but the court found that the draft amended petition substantially changed the action into a different character, introducing new issues that could more conveniently be tried in a fresh action. The Respondents opposed the application, arguing the amendment was late and came after the court had heard the original petition. The court applied principles from Rule 13(6) of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules and the Joseph Ochieng case, concluding that the amendment was not timeously filed and introduced new issues beyond the scope of the original petition.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtAppeals
…The Respondents further argue that the provisions cited only apply to disputes from County Public Service Boards and not County Assembly Service Boards, and hence the reason the preliminary objection failed. 8.…
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtJudicial Review
The court considered whether it had jurisdiction to hear the Ex Parte Applicant's judicial review motion, which alleged violations of constitutional rights related to county government recruitment. The Respondent argued that the motion was incompetent due to jurisdictional issues, claiming the Public Service Commission (PSC) had exclusive authority over county public service disputes under Sections 77 of the County Government Act and 87(2) of the Public Service Commission Act. The court dismissed the preliminary objection, ruling that the Applicant's claims involved constitutional violations not covered by the PSC's jurisdiction, and that no alternative remedy existed to resolve the grievances before the court. The court emphasized that the Applicant's allegations of constitutional breaches were distinct from the PSC's appealable matters, and that judicial review was the appropriate forum.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtJudicial Review
The court considered a motion filed on 29 June 2023 and directed that the motion be served by 4 July 2023, with respondents and interested parties to file responses within four days of service. The court also noted that the substantive motion had not been filed and ordered the parties to appear before Baari J on 11 June 2023 for further directions.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtJudicial Review
The court granted leave to commence judicial review proceedings based on the Chamber Summons dated 22 June 2023, requiring the applicant to file and serve the judicial review within 15 days.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtJudicial Review
…Speaker, County Assembly of Migori, Clerk, County Assembly of Migori and the County assembly of Migori, issued in favour of the 1st and 2nd Interested Parties. b.…
…E002 of 2023, which concerns the consideration by the County Assembly of Migori of petitions lodged pursuant to Section 15(1) of the County Government Act, and as progressed pursuant to the provisions of Petitions to County…
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
…The Applicant/Petitioner herein, is in a fight with the 4th Respondent for a nomination position at the County Assembly of Nyamira.…
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
Ogolla v Onyango Otunga & Company Advocates (Civil Appeal E101 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 27214 (KLR) (27 December 2023) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 27214 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISUMU CIVIL APPEAL E101 OF 2023 RE ABURILI, J DECEMBER 27, 2023 BETWEEN GEORGE OGOLLA .................................................................................. APPELLANT AND ONYANGO OTUNGA & COMPANY ADVOCATES ......................