Republic v Law Society of Kenya & another; Ex-Parte: Neddie Eve Akello; Barons Estates Limited (Represented By Collins Kipchumba Ng’etich)(Interested Party) [2020] eKLR Case Summary

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

Case Brief: Republic v Law Society of Kenya & another; Ex-Parte: Neddie Eve Akello; Barons Estates Limited (Represented By Collins Kipchumba Ng’etich)(Interested Party) [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Republic v. The Law Society of Kenya & Another
- Case Number: Judicial Review Application No. E1104 of 2020
- Court: High Court of Kenya
- Date Delivered: 18th September 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): P. Nyamweya
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues presented to the court include:
- Whether the ex parte Applicant, Neddie Eve Akello, is entitled to judicial review for the decisions made by the Law Society of Kenya and its Disciplinary Tribunal.
- Whether the decisions made by the Respondents were arrived at in bad faith and without due process.
- Whether the court should grant a stay of the disciplinary proceedings pending the determination of the judicial review application.

3. Facts of the Case:
The ex parte Applicant, Neddie Eve Akello, is an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya. She was notified by the Law Society of Kenya (1st Respondent) to appear before its Disciplinary Tribunal (2nd Respondent) on 21st September 2020 concerning a complaint made by Barons Estates Limited, represented by Collins Kipchumba Ng’etich. The Applicant contended that the Respondents acted without affording her an opportunity to respond to the complaint prior to referring it to the Disciplinary Tribunal, which she argued was a violation of her rights and due process.

4. Procedural History:
The ex parte Applicant filed a Chamber Summons application on 14th September 2020, seeking leave to apply for judicial review to quash the decisions of the Respondents. The application was deemed urgent due to the impending disciplinary proceedings. The court considered the merits of the application and the grounds for the urgency, ultimately granting leave for judicial review and a stay of the disciplinary proceedings.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court referenced Order 53 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which requires leave to be sought and granted before making an application for judicial review. The purpose of this rule is to prevent frivolous applications and ensure that only cases with merit proceed to a substantive hearing.

- Case Law: The court cited *Republic vs. County Council of Kwale & Another Ex Parte Kondo & 57 Others* to explain the purpose of requiring leave for judicial review. It also referred to *R (H) vs Ashworth Special Hospital Authority* regarding the discretionary nature of granting a stay of proceedings during judicial review applications.

- Application: The court found that the ex parte Applicant had demonstrated an arguable case based on the evidence of the disciplinary processes and the alleged lack of due process. The court determined that the disciplinary proceedings had not yet commenced, which justified the issuance of a stay to preserve the status quo until the legality of the Respondents’ actions could be established.

6. Conclusion:
The court granted the ex parte Applicant leave to apply for orders of certiorari to quash the decisions of the Respondents and an order of prohibition to prevent further proceedings in the disciplinary matter. The leave was also granted to operate as a stay of the disciplinary proceedings pending the determination of the substantive application. This decision underscores the importance of due process in disciplinary actions against legal practitioners.

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

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya ruled in favor of the ex parte Applicant, Neddie Eve Akello, by granting her leave to commence judicial review proceedings against the Law Society of Kenya and its Disciplinary Tribunal. The court's decision to stay the disciplinary proceedings until the review is completed highlights the critical nature of procedural fairness and the necessity for legal practitioners to be afforded due process. This case serves as a significant reference for future judicial review applications concerning disciplinary actions within professional bodies.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Republic-v-Law-Society-of-Kenya--another-Ex-Parte-Neddie-Eve-Akello-Barons-Estates-Limited-Represented-By-Collins-Kipchumba-Ng’etich-Interested-Party-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2449_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries