Nyongesa & 4 others v Egerton University College [1990] KECA 51 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenyan colleges cannot expel students or withhold exam results without first giving them notice of allegations and a chance to be heard.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the college's disciplinary bodies breached the rules of natural justice by expelling the appellants and withholding their examination results without notice and a hearing
- 2.Whether the appellants had waived their right to be heard
- 3.Whether mandamus should issue to compel the release of examination results and award of certificates
Key legal issues
#Failure of natural justice in college disciplinary proceedings
The Board, Senate and disciplinary committee acted in breach of natural justice by deciding to expel the students and withhold their results without serving notice of the allegations or giving them an opportunity to be heard; the proceedings were null and void.
The disciplinary organs, though not judges, were bound to act fairly. Each applicant had to be served with notice that he was being proceeded against and given an opportunity to state his case. The college conceded the students were never notified of the allegations nor called upon to answer them. Masime JA held the resulting proceedings null, void and of no effect, and Gachuhi JA agreed the Board acted unilaterally.
Alleged waiver of the right to be heard
Waiver was not established; the college's claim of waiver was fundamentally misconceived because no act or conduct of the applicants could reasonably be construed as waiving the right to be heard.
Counsel for the college admitted the appellants were not heard but argued they had waived the right. Nyarangi JA held that nothing in the affidavits or facts showed any conduct amounting to waiver, and that the discretion over mandamus could not be exercised to permit a breach of natural justice.
Proper procedure required of college disciplinary bodies
The court set out the fair procedure a college must follow before expelling a student: written notice of allegations, liberty to submit a written defence or attend, notification of hearing date, recording of representations and confirmation they were fairly considered.
Because the Act and college rules contained no specific procedure, the court articulated the minimum requirements of fairness, stressing the college's in loco parentis position and that natural justice is part of Kenyan culture and applies to decisions affecting rights and legitimate expectations.
Relief by way of mandamus
Mandamus was appropriate to compel the college to release the examination results and award certificates, since one purpose of mandamus is that justice may be done.
The High Court had refused mandamus. The Court of Appeal held that the failure of natural justice could not be cured by the discretionary nature of mandamus and that the college's stand could not be vindicated, justifying the orders compelling release of results and certificates.
Legal principles established
#- A disciplinary or administrative body must afford a person notice of the allegations and an opportunity to be heard before reaching a decision affecting his rights; failure to do so is a breach of natural justice that renders the decision liable to be set aside.
- A student may not be deprived of the award of a degree, diploma or certificate without prior notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to defend himself.
- The discretion to grant mandamus must be exercised judicially and may not be used to condone a breach of natural justice.
- Courts will not abdicate jurisdiction over internal disciplinary proceedings of domestic bodies.
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal allowed
- 2.Ruling and order of the High Court set aside
- 3.Egerton University ordered to release to the appellants the results of the Diploma examination for which they sat in July 1986
- 4.Egerton University ordered to award the relevant certificates to those of the appellants who passed their respective examinations
- 5.Costs of the appeal awarded to the appellants
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the leading judgment. Held that the college disciplinary organs breached the rules of natural justice by expelling the students and withholding their results without giving them an opportunity to be heard, and that no waiver of that right was established. Allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court ruling.
I wish to rest my decision on the ground that the appellants were not heard. There is no doubt that there was a failure of natural justice.p. 2
Wrote the judgment
Concurred in allowing the appeal and added a separate judgment emphasising that a student who completes a course should not be deprived of his diploma without prior notice of the allegations and a hearing.
a student who has studied to the completion of a university course and who claims to be entitled to the award of a degree, diploma, certificate or other award should not suffer the penalty of deprivation of such award without notice of a hearingp. 4
Wrote the judgment
Concurred in a short separate judgment, citing Halsbury's Laws of England on the duty of bodies exercising quasi-judicial functions to listen fairly to both sides, and agreed with the proposed orders.
the four students were not given a chance to air their views on the allegations made against them in defence prior to the decision that was made had been reachedp. 5
- On appeal from
- High Court at Nakuru
- High Court Misc Civil Application No 10 of 1987
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over the High Court (appeal from the Ruling and Order of the High Court at Nakuru)
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
I would allow the appeal, set aside the ruling and order of the High Court and order Egerton University to release to the appellants the results of the Diploma examination for which the appellants sat in July, 1986 and to award the relevant certificates to those of the appellants who may have passed their respective examinations. I would award the costs of the appeal to the appellants.
Every college authority or body must be taken to be cognisant of the requirements of natural justice.
Rules of natural justice apply because any decision would affect the rights and legitimate expectations of those concerned.
I, therefore, hold that the proceedings of the disciplinary bodies of the respondent college in so far as they concern the matters complained of by these appellants were in breach of the rules of natural justice and are consequently null, void and of no effect.
the four students were not given a chance to air their views on the allegations made against them in defence prior to the decision that was made had been reached.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nyongesa & 4 others v Egerton University College [1990] KECA 51 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1990). Civil Appeal No 90 of 1989. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1990/51/eng@1990-12-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.