THE DOCTRINE OF MOOTNESS
Image may be subject to copyright.

THE DOCTRINE OF MOOTNESS

SCENARIO;

??1. A student is suspended from school for a disciplinary issue.

? 2. The student challenges the suspension in court, arguing it was unjust.

?3. The student seeks a court order to lift the suspension.

? 4. The court schedules a hearing to consider the case.

? 5. Before the hearing occurs, the suspension period ends.

? 6. The student is allowed to return to school.

? 7. The original issue (suspension) is now resolved due to the passage of time.

?8. There is no longer an active controversy requiring the court's intervention.

? 9. The court considers the case moot because its decision would no longer have any practical effect.

? 10. The case is dismissed,

Introduction

The doctrine of mootness is a principle in legal proceedings that prevents courts from hearing cases that no longer require resolution. Rooted in the broader concept of justiciability, mootness ensures that courts only address actual, ongoing controversies where their decisions can have practical effects. When the underlying issue in a case has been resolved or rendered irrelevant by subsequent events, the case is deemed moot, and courts typically decline to issue rulings. This doctrine preserves judicial resources and maintains the integrity of the court system by avoiding hypothetical or abstract disputes.

?In the?Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th?edition,

?“moot” is defined as “Having no practical significance; hypothetical or academic.”

?“moot case”?is defined as “a matter in which a controversy no longer exists; a case that?presents only an abstract question that does not arise from existing facts or rights”, and as a verb, as meaning “to render a question as of no practical significance”.

?Kenyan Case Law and Legal Precedent:

?In Okiya Omtatah Okoiti & Others v Attorney General & Others [2020] eKLR, the court held thus;

? “A matter is moot if further legal proceedings with regard to it can have no effect, or events have placed it beyond the reach of the law. Thereby the matter has been deprived of practical significance or rendered purely academic. Mootness arises when there is no longer an actual controversy between the parties to a court case, and any ruling by the court would have no actual, practical impact.”

?In? Dande & Others v Inspector General, National Police Service & Others [2023] eKLR, the Supreme Court ?states thus;

“ An appeal or an issue is moot when a decision will not have the effect of resolving a live controversy affecting or potentially affecting the rights of parties. Such a live controversy must be present not only when the action or proceeding is commenced but also when the court is called upon to reach a decision.”

?In Pharmacy and Poisons Board v Wanjala & 7 Others [2021] KECA 348: the court sated thus;

?“Once the legislature amended the law to vest certain functions solely in the appellant, the appeal regarding those functions became moot because the legal landscape had fundamentally changed.”

?In Institute for Social Accountability & Another v National Assembly & 3 Others & 5 Others [2022] eKLR, The Supreme Court in states thus;

?“…The emerging general principle flowing from the above decisions is that where a new statute is enacted that unequivocally and clearly addresses the concerns that are at the heart of a dispute then such a dispute will be moot.”

?Conclusion

As demonstrated through various cases, the principle of mootness maintains judicial efficiency by dismissing cases where the underlying issues have been resolved or are no longer relevant. Similarly, legislative changes or new statutes, can render cases moot if they resolve the dispute entirely or alter the legal landscape significantly.

?The doctrine ensures that the courts' rulings remain pertinent and practical, reinforcing the system’s focus on real and substantive issues rather than abstract or hypothetical questions. By adhering to this doctrine, the judiciary upholds the integrity and effectiveness of legal proceedings, aligning its decisions with the actual needs and realities of the parties involved.

?I HOPE THIS ARTICLE WAS HELPFUL

For more information contact;

[email protected]

Indeed So helpful.

回复
Elizabeth Onyango

Lawyer||Trainee Advocate||Certified Professional Mediator||Legal Researcher||

3 个月

A very informative article Sylvia????

回复
Wahu Wangari

Writer, Researcher, Legal Consultant,Women Rights and Climate Justice Activist, Decolonialist.

3 个月

Very great insights Sylvia!

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了