Court dismisses Nicco Movers' bid to overturn PSV license suspension

 

Nicco Movers Sacco’s bid to get back on the road has hit a snag after the High Court rejected its application challenging the suspension of its PSV operator’s licence following two fatal accidents and safety concerns involving its fleet of 159 vehicles.

In the ruling, Justice Janet Mulwa dismissed the company’s application to set aside a Transport Licensing Appeals Board (TLAB) decision pending the hearing and determination of its appeal, finding that it had failed to demonstrate substantial loss.

“Therefore, the Court is not persuaded that the Applicant has established the likelihood of the appeal being rendered nugatory, and hence the likelihood of substantial loss,” the judge ruled.

The dispute stems from TLAB’s August 31, 2026 decision, which set aside the National Transport and Safety Authority’s (NTSA) revocation of the operator’s licence but substituted it with a suspension with immediate effect.

The board directed Nicco Movers to address ten concerns and a way forward captured in NTSA’s minutes of a June 12, 2026 meeting within seven days.

It further directed that, in default of compliance within 14 days, NTSA could initiate the process of revoking the licence after issuing a further notice to show cause.

Nicco Movers moved to the High Court on September 1, 2026, and obtained interim orders on September 2.

Its chief executive, Phenius Gitau Mugo, argued that the continued suspension was causing substantial financial losses by the day and threatening the company’s viability.

However, NTSA’s Director of Road Safety, Dr Andrew Langat, opposed the application, arguing that the suspension was necessary to protect the travelling public.

He cited compliance reports and two fatal incidents along the Thika Superhighway, including the June 5, 2026 death of the son of Jacinta Nzilani Mutuku, who is an interested party in the case.

In her ruling, Justice Mulwa dismissed preliminary objections by NTSA and Ms Mutuku that the appeal was incompetent because the company had not filed a memorandum of appeal.

The judge noted that Nicco Movers filed the memorandum on September 29, 2026, resolving the issue.

“There is now a proper appeal before this Court,” she said.

However, the judge found that the company had failed to demonstrate the nature or extent of the financial losses it claimed to be suffering as a result of the suspension.

“The Applicant has merely made a blanket assertion that the suspension would cause substantial financial loss by the day. The nature of the substantial loss was not explained to the Court, nor was the projected financial loss,” she said.

Justice Mulwa added that the financial losses alleged by the company could be quantified and compensated through an appropriate legal process.

“Financial loss in the nature alleged by the Applicant is reasonably quantifiable, and any prejudice suffered on that account can be remedied in an appropriate forum,” she ruled.

The judge further observed that TLAB had allowed the company to address the safety and compliance concerns that led to the suspension.

However, she said there was no evidence that Nicco Movers had attempted to comply with the board’s directions.

“There is no evidence that the Applicant attempted to do so,” she said.

Justice Mulwa also found that the company had not demonstrated exceptional circumstances to justify granting, at an interlocutory stage, orders that would effectively give it the very relief it was seeking in the substantive appeal.

“The court finds no merit in the Applicant’s motion dated 01/09/2026. It is hereby dismissed with no orders as to costs,” she ruled.