Republic v Director of Public Prosecutions & 3 others Ex Parte Zhang Aixian; Jiang Baoqui & 3 others (Interested parties) [2020] eKLR Case

Court
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
P. Nyamweya
Judgment Date
September 18, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
In Republic v Director of Public Prosecutions & 3 others Ex Parte Zhang Aixian; Jiang Baoqui & 3 others [2020] eKLR, explore key legal findings involving the DPP and implications for justice. Stay informed on this pivotal case.

Case Brief: Republic v Director of Public Prosecutions & 3 others Ex Parte Zhang Aixian; Jiang Baoqui & 3 others (Interested parties) [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Zhang Aixian v. The Director of Public Prosecutions & Others
- Case Number: MISC E041 OF 2020
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- Date Delivered: 18th September 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): P. Nyamweya
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues presented in this case include:
- Whether the Applicant is entitled to judicial review orders of Certiorari to quash the decision of the Respondents to charge and prosecute him.
- Whether the Applicant should be granted an order of Prohibition to halt further proceedings in the Kibera Chief Magistrate's Court against him.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Applicant, Zhang Aixian, filed a judicial review application against the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Inspector General of Police, and the Directorate of Criminal Investigations, who are the Respondents in this case. The background of the case involves the prosecution of Zhang Aixian in Kibera Chief Magistrate's Court for offenses related to a dispute that the Applicant claims is purely civil and commercial in nature, involving the 1st Interested Party, Jiang Baoqui, and the 2nd Interested Party, Silzha Limited. The Applicant argues that he and Jiang Baoqui are directors of the companies involved, and thus the criminal charges against him are unfounded.

4. Procedural History:
The Applicant filed a Chamber Summons on 17th September 2020, seeking urgent leave to apply for judicial review orders. The court found the matter urgent due to the commencement of criminal proceedings against the Applicant. The court considered the application based on the rules set forth in Order 53 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which requires leave before applying for judicial review orders. The court's decision was based on the Applicant's demonstration of an arguable case, leading to the granting of leave to proceed with the judicial review.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court relied on Order 53 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which mandates that leave must be obtained before seeking judicial review orders. It also referenced the principle from *Republic vs. County Council of Kwale & Another Ex Parte Kondo & 57 Others* regarding the necessity of establishing a meritorious case for further consideration.
- Case Law: The court cited *Sharma vs. Brown Antoine* to explain the threshold for an arguable case, emphasizing that a ground of challenge must have a realistic prospect of success. Additionally, the court referenced *R (H) vs. Ashworth Special Hospital Authority* regarding the discretionary nature of granting a stay of proceedings pending judicial review.
- Application: The court applied the aforementioned rules and case law to the facts, concluding that the Applicant had provided sufficient evidence to establish an arguable case. The court determined that the criminal proceedings against the Applicant were ongoing and thus amenable to a stay, preserving the status quo until the substantive application could be determined.

6. Conclusion:
The court granted the Applicant leave to apply for both Certiorari and Prohibition, thereby allowing the judicial review process to proceed. The decision underscores the court's role in protecting individuals from potentially unlawful criminal proceedings when the underlying issues may be civil in nature.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the ruling.

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya granted Zhang Aixian leave to apply for judicial review orders to quash the criminal charges against him and to prohibit further proceedings in the Kibera Chief Magistrate's Court. This case highlights the court's commitment to ensuring that individuals are not subjected to criminal prosecution for matters that are fundamentally civil and commercial disputes. The ruling has significant implications for the intersection of civil and criminal law, particularly in cases where the nature of the dispute may be mischaracterized.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Republic-v-Director-of-Public-Prosecutions--3-others-Ex-Parte-Zhang-Aixian-Jiang-Baoqui--3-others-Interested-parties-[2020]-eKLR-Case_2411_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries