Report on Rapid Results Initiative

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 75
  • Published : March 3, 2012
Open Document
Text Preview

Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction3
2.0 General background of Milimani law Courts3
3.0 Area of interest4
4.0 Statement of the problem5
5.0 Outcome in 50 Days5
6.0 Rationality of the RRI10
7.0 Challenges to Implementation of the RRI10
8.0 Recommendations11
9.0 Conclusion12

1.0 Introduction
On September 16, 2011 the Chief Justice of Kenya Hon. Charles Mutunga was overwhelmed by the number of cases that were piling at the Milimani Law Courts, located in Nairobi for the past one year and the number of judges available to deal with the cases filed in the division. It came to his notice that every month cases that were determined and dismissed were few owing to the limited number of judges to decide the cases and therefore they continued to pile at an increasing alarm. He therefore summoned the judges assigned at the law courts to find the best solution to reduce the backlog of cases at the law courts. In solidarity, the judges agreed to meet and discuss the best strategy to reduce the backlog of cases and afterwards provide the chief justice with the feedback in 100 days concerning their progress. The judges agreed to use the rapid results initiative through commercial and admiralty division to reduce the backlog from 7500 to 3500 cases in 100 days. 2.0 General background of Milimani law Courts

The committee as chaired by the Hon. Justice R. Kwach, (retired) on administration of justice appointed by the Chief justice in January 1998 recommended among other things that the high court in Nairobi be split into four (4) divisions namely, Family division, Criminal division, civil division and commercial division each with its own registry. Indeed, in February 1998 the commercial division of the high court was established and based at Milimani Commercial courts Nairobi specifically to hear and determine commercial matters classified in the circular dated 18th November 1997 by the Hon. The Chief Justice A.M Cocakar (retired) as:- i. All proceedings in which an injunction sought to restrain the realization of securities whether debentures or charges. ii. All company matters and applications including winding up, excluding cases in which a company is suing or is being sued as an entity. iii. All Bankruptcy matters.

iv. All matters relating to arbitration other than enforcement of awards; excluding any matter relating to land affected by the Land control board. v. All intellectual property matters
vi. All claims for the recovery of unsecured debts (but including claims against guarantors) due to bank or other financial institution in which a defense is filed. On the filling of the defense the matter to be automatically transferred to the commercial court. vii. Such matters are certified by a judge of the commercial court as being suitable for determination in the commercial court having regard to the amount involved; the need for a speedy hearing and the nature of the case. It was felt that in considering the nature of the case the judge could be guided by wording similar to the definition of a commercial action in the English order 72 Rule 1(1), namely “arising out of the ordinary transactions of merchants and traders and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing words, any cause relating to the construction of a mercantile document, the export or import of merchandise, affreightment, insurance, banking mercantile agency and mercantile usage.” The Hon. The chief Justice E. Gicheru (retired) through Kenya Gazette dated 19th January 2007 renamed the commercial division “Commercial and Tax Division” of the high court and in addition to commercial matters presently dealt with by the division to hear and determine all tax matters in the republic of Kenya lodged under any law by or against the Kenya Revenue Authority or any...
tracking img