Republic v Council For Legal Education, Kenya School Of Law, Director, Kenya School Of Law & Attorney General Exparte Gregory Odhiambo Ndege, Naanyu Letipila, Duncan Taalam Kimutai & Felix Momanyi Manoti [2014] KEHC 7350 (KLR) | Judicial Review | Esheria

Republic v Council For Legal Education, Kenya School Of Law, Director, Kenya School Of Law & Attorney General Exparte Gregory Odhiambo Ndege, Naanyu Letipila, Duncan Taalam Kimutai & Felix Momanyi Manoti [2014] KEHC 7350 (KLR)

Full Case Text

IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI

MILIMANI LAW COURTS

JUDICIAL REVIEW DIVISION

MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPL. NO. 385 OF 2013

BETWEEN

REPUBLIC ............………………………….…………………….. APPLICANT

AND

COUNCIL FOR LEGAL EDUCATION  ........................... 1ST  RESPONDENT

KENYA SCHOOL OF LAW …………………………….… 2ND RESPONDENT

THE DIRECTOR, KENYA

SCHOOL OF LAW …………………………………..……. 3RD RESPONDENT

ATTORNEY GENERAL ………………………………….. 4TH RESPONDENT

EXPARTE

GREGORY ODHIAMBO NDEGE

NAANYU LETIPILA

DUNCAN TAALAM KIMUTAI

FELIX MOMANYI MANOTI

RULING

The Notice of Motion dated 11th November 2013 sought orders of judicial review to quash the decision of the 1st and 2nd respondents denying the applicants direct admission to the Kenya School of Law or barring them from writing the pre-bar examination.

When the matter came up for directions, counsel for the applicants admitted that the applicants has sat the pre-bar examination and passed.  He asks the court to adjourn the matter pending further action by the 1st and 2nd respondents regarding admission.

Counsel for the 1st and 2nd respondents submits that the matter is now spent as the basis for the grant of leave and the Motion has been dealt with and the issue of admission of the applicants is a separate consideration under section 16 and Schedule 2 of the Kenya School of Law Act, 2012.

I am satisfied that the subject matter of the application has been dealt with by the 1st and 2nd respondent as the applicants have sat for and passed the pre-bar examination.  Under Schedule 2 of the Kenya School of Law Act, 2012, they are entitled to apply for and be considered for admission to the Kenya School of Law. The consideration and decision, whether or not they are admitted, is a separate matter and constitutes a separate cause of action.

In the circumstances, the Notice of Motion dated 11th December 2013 lacks substratum.  It is dismissed with no order as to costs.

DATEDand DELIVEREDat NAIROBIthis28thday ofJanuary 2014

D.S. MAJANJA

JUDGE