Ali Abdhulahi Mursal v Wardere Kalihe Shalle & 6 others [2020] KEELRC 1929 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court blocked a chief's appointment because the successful candidate's D+ grade fell below the advertised C requirement, pending full hearing.
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 court should issue temporary orders restraining the 1st respondent from taking up the post of Chief, Boji Heri Location in Wajir West Sub-county pending the hearing of this petition
- 2.Whether the court should issue an order compelling the 5th respondent to file records leading to the appointment of the chief, Boji Heri location in Wajir West Sub-County
- 3.Whether the court should stop the swearing-in of the candidate appointed chief, Boji Heri location, Wajir West Sub-County
Key legal issues
#Whether the petitioner established a prima facie case for interim relief
Yes - the alleged appointment of a candidate with a mean grade D+ against an advertised requirement of C (plain) showed an apparent infringement of a legal right calling for rebuttal
Applying Giella v Cassman Brown and Mrao Ltd v First American Bank, the court found that the petitioner's uncontroverted affidavit evidence that the successful candidate did not meet the advertised minimum academic qualification raised an apparent infringement of his right and of constitutional values on inclusivity and merit, sufficient at the prima facie stage.
Whether the petitioner would suffer irreparable loss not compensable in damages
Yes - the loss to the marginalised community in being denied leadership and resources cannot be adequately compensated in damages
Relying on Pius Kipchirchir Kogo v Frank Kimeli Tenai, the court held that constitutional safeguards protecting marginalised populations must be firmly addressed; the potential loss arising from the 1st respondent's appointment and the resultant marginalisation of the Ajuran community could not be gainsaid or compensated in damages.
Where the balance of convenience lies
With the petitioner, given the absence of any contrary facts from the respondents and the need to avoid wasting public resources
Because the respondents filed only grounds of opposition without a replying affidavit, no facts contradicted the petitioner's account. The court found the injury from the appointment clear and held the balance of convenience favoured preserving the position of chief pending the petition's determination, avoiding waste of public resources.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant for an interlocutory injunction must sequentially establish a prima facie case, irreparable injury and balance of convenience
- A prima facie case in civil matters is one where a legal right has apparently been infringed so as to call for an explanation or rebuttal from the opposite party
- Grounds of opposition not verified by an affidavit deny the court relevant facts and leave uncontroverted affidavit evidence
Court orders
#- 1.Pending the hearing and determination of the petition an order of injunction is issued restraining the 1st respondent from taking up the post of Chief Boji Heri Location in Wajir West Sub-County
- 2.The respondents are jointly and severally restrained from swearing-in or handing over the tools of power/office or allowing the 1st respondent to serve in the office of Chief, Boji Heri location pending the hearing and determination of the petition
- 3.The respondents are allowed 14 days to file responses to the petition, upon which the court shall give hearing directions on priority basis
- 4.Costs shall be in the petition
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Not stated in the judgment; petition anchored on Articles 10, 35, 56, 179, 232 and 233 of the Constitution, 2010
Relief refused
#Order compelling the 5th respondent to file minutes of the interview, list of applicants, shortlisted applicants, evaluation documents and other recruitment records
The court held it would serve justice to hear both parties on the merit after respondents file responses, rather than compel production at the interlocutory stage
Costs
Costs shall be in the petition
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.
Accordingly, the petitioner’s application dated 13th November, 2020 is hereby found with merit and is allowed in the following terms;
Pending the hearing and determination of the petition an order of injunction is hereby issued restraining the 1 st respondent from taking up the post of Chief Boji Heri Location in Wajir West Sub-County;
The respondents are hereby jointly and severally restrained from swearing-in or handing over the tools of power/office or allowing the 1st respondent to serve in the office of Chief, Boji Heri location in Wajir West Sub – County pending the hearing and determination of the petition herein;
the court finds the petitioner has established a prima facie case to justify the grant of the orders sought
the court finds the balance of convenience favours him to justify the orders sought
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment does not state the name of the court or the case number; coram is limited to the signature 'M. MBARU / JUDGE'
The 1st respondent is repeatedly described as not having entered appearance, with inconsistent phrasing ('of file any responses')
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ali Abdhulahi Mursal v Wardere Kalihe Shalle & 6 others [2020] KEELRC 1929 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2020/1929/eng@2020-12-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.