The Nairobi Hospital./FILE
Senior members of the Kenya Hospital Association that owns the Nairobi Hospital have written to Chief Justice Martha Koome seeking her urgent intervention on the High Court’s administrative handling of cases involving the premier medical facility.
Dr Maurice Wambani and Peter Wainaina want Koome to order for investigations into how a case they had filed before the High Court’s civil division was transferred to the commercial division and assigned a new case number.
In the letter addressed to High Court registrar at the Milimani Law Courts and copied to Koome, the two criticized the file transfer terming it a serious compromise of the integrity of the court record.
They claimed to have obtained orders from the High Court’s civil division on , 2025 which barred Nairobi Hospital managers from withdrawing, transacting or interfering with the hospital’s fixed deposits, infrastructural bonds, treasury bills, overdrafts, pensions and provident fund.
The orders also suspended the convening of meetings of the board of management, including meetings of its committees and subcommittees and well as the annual general meeting.
Also blocked was the procurement of new capital projects or procurement relating to ongoing capital projects.
The orders were extended on , 2025 wand remain in force to date.
“However, the board of management, senior management and the company secretary continue to conduct the governance, financial, procurement and administrative affairs of the hospital’s though no court orders are in force.”
They contend the their protest against the transfer of the court file from the civil division to the commercial division, including correspondence with the presiding judge of the civil division have seen no corrective measure taken.
“The judge who was properly seized of the matter and who had already issued directions ought not to have been stripped of the matter through administrative channels without a transparent and recorded judicial basis for doing so,” they say.
They claim the judge who was initially seized of the matter got a handwritten communication about the file transfer while on leave.
“The applicants are further troubled that judges who disclosed conflicts of interests are said to have proceeded to make determinations, during mentions and on the said transfer.”
A ruling on the matter by the new court was scheduled for .
“Your Lordship’s oversight is therefore respectfully sought as a determination reached in these circumstances may cause the subsisting protective orders to lapse before the substantive allegations are heard and determined on their merits.”
