Skip to content
MMS Advocates

Supreme Court Affirms High Court Jurisdiction in Public Interest Challenge to State Corporation CEO Appointments

Abigael Chilango··1 min read

In a landmark judgment delivered on 3 July 2026, the Supreme Court upheld the jurisdiction of the High Court to hear a constitutional petition challenging the recruitment and appointment of Chief Executive Officers and Managing Directors of State corporations, including the appointment at Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital (MTRH). The petition had been filed by Nakuru-based surgeon Dr. Magare Gikenyi and other public interest litigants, who alleged constitutional violations in the recruitment process.

The Court rejected arguments that the dispute fell exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (ELRC). It held that while the ELRC has jurisdiction over pre-employment disputes, including challenges to recruitment, shortlisting, interview, and selection processes, the present petition was fundamentally a public interest constitutional challenge brought by citizens seeking to enforce constitutional values of equality, transparency, inclusivity, and good governance. The petitioners were not acting as applicants for the positions, prospective employees, or representatives of unsuccessful candidates, but as citizens invoking Articles 22 and 258 of the Constitution to challenge alleged constitutional violations.

The Supreme Court therefore affirmed that the High Court was properly seized of the matter under Article 165(3) of the Constitution. At the same time, the Court clarified that the ELRC’s jurisdiction is not limited to disputes arising from an existing employer-employee relationship and extends to constitutional challenges involving pre-employment recruitment processes. Consequently, the Court partially allowed both the appeals and cross-appeals, upheld the High Court’s jurisdiction in the specific case, and directed that Nakuru High Court Constitutional Petition No. E011 of 2024 be heard on a priority basis.

The decision provides important guidance on the jurisdictional boundaries between the High Court and the ELRC and reinforces the role of public interest litigation in ensuring accountability and constitutional compliance in appointments to public offices.

Read next

The library
Publications20 Jan 2026

Privatising Public Assets: KPC Share Sale and Safaricom Divestiture

Kenya’s ongoing privatisation agenda has placed the selling of shares in major state-linked corporations at the centre of public, legal,…

Abigael Chilango · 2 min read

Publications
Publications30 Jul 2026

Supreme Court Upholds Tax Exemptions Under Kenya–Japan Financing Agreements: Analysing Matindi v National Assembly & 4 Others, SC Petition No. E006 of 2025 [2026] KESC

The Supreme Court, in a bench comprising Mwilu DCJ & VP, Wanjala, Njoki, Lenaola and Ouko, SCJJ, dismissed a public…

Maureen Mutai · 4 min read

Publications04 Mar 2024

Navigating Intellectual Property Rights in Innovations: Balancing Employer and Employee Interests

To thrive in these unprecedented economic and digital times, organizations need to embrace creativity and innovation. Through innovation an organization can achieve competitive advantage which creates room for growth and sustainability. An organization’s innovative climate is driven by its human resource. Employees breathe life into innovation through their knowledge, skills and abilities; while employers are the driving force, they provide the employees with the required environment and resources to innovate. In Kenya, the main hindrance towards the development of new inventions is the lack of awareness of laws and legal rights of the employees and employers related to ownership of intellectual property of the invention. Due to this gap, innovators are exploited, this demotivates them from actualising their creative potential, for fear that the organization or employer will take all the credit. In a recent South African case of Vodacom (Pty) Ltd v Makate and Another (401/2022) [2024] ZASCA the Supreme Court ordered Vodacom to compensate Mr. Makate in billions for the ‘please call me’ idea he invented when he was an employee at Vodacom, although the idea was wholly operationalised by Vodacom. Such lawsuits against employers and organizations can be prevented by implementing the rights granted to each party under the law. This Article will discuss how the law creates a balance between the rights of the employer and the innovator employee to ensure both benefit from the innovation. Innovations are governed by the Industrial Property Act, 2001 (IPA). The general rule under…

MMS Advocates · 4 min read

Bring us the facts.

We will tell you what the law does with them.