Counties

Court slams brakes on KPA’s commuter bus service tender

port+cranes

Cargo cranes within the port of Mombasa. FILE PHOTO | NMG

Summary

  • Justice Patrick Otieno sitting at the High Court in Mombasa issued the temporary orders pending hearing of an application by Royal Hisham Ltd, which currently provides the commuter bus services.
  • Royal Hisham Ltd argues that the advertisement by KPA contravenes terms and conditions related to renewal and extension of the original agreement dated December 16, 2009 for a period of five years.

The High Court has temporarily restrained the Kenya Ports Authority (KPA) from accepting, receiving or dealing with a tender it advertised for provision of commuter bus services at its premises in Mombasa, Nairobi and Kisumu.

Justice Patrick Otieno sitting at the High Court in Mombasa issued the temporary orders pending hearing of an application by Royal Hisham Ltd, which currently provides the commuter bus services.

Royal Hisham Ltd argues that the advertisement by KPA contravenes terms and conditions related to renewal and extension of the original agreement dated December 16, 2009 for a period of five years.

“The defendant (KPA) has extended the agreement unilaterally for a period of six months from April 12 to October 11 and three months commencing on October 13 in contravention of the terms and conditions of the agreement,” part of the suit documents states.

According to Royal Hisham Ltd, it has invested substantially and borrowed colossal amount of money from a bank and purchased commuter buses from China.

“The plaintiffs claim against the defendant is that the extension period less than five years contravenes the original agreements terms and conditions for provisions of commuter bus service at the defendant’s premises,” argues the company.

The commuter bus service providersays there is no agreement executed between the parties to confirm each party’s obligations during the existence of the contract.

Royal Hisham Ltd further notes that the commuter buses at KPA’s premises cannot be used for normal commuting or travelling due to guidelines from the manufacturer.

“The plaintiffs’ buses are specifically to be used at the ports with rails friendly to the disabled persons and cannot be used for normal communicating or long distance travelling,” argues the company.

Royal Hisham Ltd says KPA is aware that it borrowed loans from a bank to purchase the commuter buses to provide services at their premises and are servicing them (loans).

It says that the renewal or extension clause made it to be first choice to provide commuter bus service at KPA premises.

“The defendant behaves as if they are the major party in the agreement and the plaintiff a minor party due to their unilaterally extension and variation of the terms and conditions of the agreement,” argues the company.