Case
numbers HC 2190/09 and 2224/09 were heard simultaneously under judgment number
HH115-09. Judgment was handed down on 21 October 2009.
Immediately
after handing down of the judgment, I realised that although I had dealt with
the merits of both matters in the body of the judgment, I had only disposed of
case number HC 2224/09, I had omitted to give an order in respect of HC
2190/09. I then invited the parties counsel to chambers and advised them of the
fact.
They
both consented to the correction of the judgment in HH115-09 for completeness.
By
consent of both parties, and using my inherent powers, I hereby correct the
clear omission in HH115-09, in failing to dispose of HC 2190/09, by adding the
following paragraph immediately after the penultimate para in HH115-09 –
In
view of my findings above, I will grant the order as amended. I have amended
para 2 of the draft order to give the applicants an opportunity to purge their
contempt, failing which they will be incarcerated. I will not grant para 4 and
6 as they were not pursued in the heads of argument and in submissions.
Accordingly,
it is ordered that –
1.
The application in HC 2224/09 be and is hereby dismissed with costs.
2.
The applicants are found guilty of contempt of this court.
3.
The applicants are sentenced to imprisonment for a period of thirty days which
is wholly suspended for a period of forty-eight hours to allow the applicants
to purge their contempt, failing which the Registrar shall issue the necessary
warrant of arrests, and shall send them to the Deputy Sheriff for immediate
enforcement.
4.
The fifth respondent is ordered to take immediate action to provide the Deputy
Sheriff with effective support and assistance for the immediate enforcement of
the order in HC 6215/08.
5. The applicants to pay the respondents costs.
