Abdi v Garissa County Public Service Board & another (Employment and Labour Relations Judicial Review E049 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1303 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether an order of prohibition should issue to stop the Respondents from proceeding with or acting on the recruitment/interview process for County Administrators and Deputy County Administrators
- 2.Whether the application was overtaken by events, the interviews having been concluded and appointments made
- 3.Whether the proper forum for alleged breach/contempt of orders in ELRCPET E205 of 2022 is that same file rather than a fresh judicial review application
Key legal issues
#Whether prohibition could issue against the impugned recruitment process
Application dismissed; orders not merited as they were overtaken by events, the interviews having concluded and appointments issued
The court noted the interviews concluded on 20th September 2024 and successful applicants were recruited with appointment letters. Further, the claim that aggrieved employees were reinstated in ELRC Petition E205 of 2022 meant any alleged breach or contempt of that court's orders had to be raised in that same file, not via a fresh judicial review application.
Proper forum for alleged contempt/breach of orders in ELRC Petition E205 of 2022
The same file in which the orders were issued is the proper forum
The court reasoned that the applicant's grievance rested on alleged reinstatement orders in Petition E205 of 2022. Any breach or contempt of those orders must be raised before the court that issued them; instituting a fresh judicial review application was the wrong procedural route.
Legal principles established
#- An order of prohibition cannot issue in vain to stop a decision already made and implemented
- Alleged breach or contempt of a court's orders should be ventilated in the same file in which the orders were issued
Court orders
#- 1.The judicial review application is dismissed
- 2.No order of costs (each party bears own costs)
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original judicial review jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (order of prohibition)
Relief refused
#Order of prohibition against the Respondents proceeding with the recruitment process/decision following interviews conducted 16th-20th September 2024
Overtaken by events - interviews concluded, appointments made; and proper forum for any contempt is the file in which orders were issued
Costs of the application
Application dismissed with no order of costs
Costs
No order of costs - each party to bear own costs
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.
The Respondents aver that an order of prohibition can only prevent the making of a decision; such an order cannot be issued in vain to stop an already implemented decision.
That being the case, the proper forum to ventilate any breaches or contempt of the orders of the court would be in the same file Petition E205 of 2022.
I therefore dismiss this judicial review application with no order of costs.
Issues in the judgment
#Judgment inconsistently cites the related petition as 'ELRC No. E205 of 2022', 'ELRCPET E205 of 2022' and 'ELRCPET E205 of 2024'
Judgment inconsistently refers to the related petition number (E205 of 2022 vs E205 of 2024)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Abdi v Garissa County Public Service Board & another (Employment and Labour Relations Judicial Review E049 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1303 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Judicial Review Application (Motion dated 26th November 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1303/eng@2025-05-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.