Having insulted Raila, Magaya and Ndii, Miguna may have alienated himself from the better lawyers who’d have fought his battles (Khaminwa, Orengo, Amollo, etc.). He is left with Nelson Havi, a hollow upstart dying for recognition.
Record unknown, but we are sure that he’s very junior in the pecking order, young enough to be rudely barred from competing for an LSK position.
On Monday, Justice John Mativo dismissed Mr Havi’s suit challenging a decision that barred him from contesting LSK’s presidency, saying he was not discriminated against.
“To hold that an applicant for a job, an interview or Mr Havi to contest an election must be given a hearing just to be explained to why he did not satisfy the requirements would be imposing an unnecessary burden upon the decision maker, which was not contemplated under the law.
“To me it is sufficient that he was notified the reasons why he did not qualify,” ruled Justice Mativo.
A recent ruling of the Ontario Superior Court is a reminder to plaintiffs that they must present more than bald allegations that evidence of infringement has been contorted or suppressed in order to discharge their burden when defending a motion for summary judgment.
In Miguna v. Walmart Canada et al., 2015 ONSC 5744, the defendant brought a summary judgment motion seeking the dismissal of the Copyright Act infringement claim commenced by the plaintiff, Mr. Miguna, a Kenyan Canadian residing in Ontario who had served as senior adviser to the prime minister of Kenya. Mr. Miguna had authored an insider account of corruption within the Kenyan government in a book entitled “Peeling Back the Mask,” published by Gilgamesh Africa Ltd. in 2012. Mr. Miguna asserted that the publishing agreement with Gilgamesh was a fraud from the beginning, and he terminated the publishing contract in January 2013.
You can’t be this bad, surely there must be a genius to his schemes that mere mortals like me and all those Canadian judges can’t see. On a whim, I would hire the guy to represent me… then when I lose I go for a mistrial due to improper representation.