Kenya Bureau of Standards v Powerex Lubricants Limited

The Court read section 14(1)(g) as requiring a reasoned, good-faith belief, more than bare suspicion, before seizure. The seizure notice covered 'all Power Brands Goods' without stating any basis, paralysing the respondent's operations. The Court held that even though the Act is silent on giving reasons, the reasonableness test within section 14(1) behoves inspectors to explain their belief; unexplained seizure flouts natural justice and invites judicial review.

The Tribunal route presupposes a decision of the Bureau or Council, which did not exist since the samples were never tested. Section 14B(3) prescribes release of results within 14 days after testing, not after seizure, imposing no time limit on testing itself and enabling possible abuse of power. Waiting indefinitely would be unreasonable; judicial review lay for the procedural irrationality.

The Court held that the respondent's renewed licences did not shield it from unannounced inspections during the licence period. Under section 14 the Bureau may inspect at any time, provided there is reasonable cause or belief that an offence is being committed. The doctrine therefore added nothing on these facts, and the appeal failed on the natural justice and reasonableness grounds instead.

The Court corrected the appellant's misinterpretation of section 14B(3), holding it prescribes when results must be released after testing, not when testing must occur. This gap gives leeway for possible abuse of power, as an inspector can keep samples untested indefinitely to the prejudice of a trader whose operations may be grounded by the seizure.