Security firm sues regulator over withheld licence

Security Firm Wells Fargo has sued Private Security Regulatory Authority for failing to license it for over two years despite submitting all required documents and complying with the requirements of the Private Security Regulation Act, 2016.

In the suit, Wells Fargo claims that it submitted its application on March 20, 2020 and is yet to receive a response and now risks losing contracts from their customers for failure to provide a license to operate as a private security services provider.

High Court Judge Jairus Ngaah however declined to certify the matter as urgent and instead allowed them to file a motion compelling the regulator to issue them with a temporary license.

The Judge further declined to compel the regulator to issue them with a temporary license to help the company continue with its operations saying they had not raised sufficient reason.

Business collapse

Through lawyer Lawson Ondieki, the security firm argues that the Regulatory Authority’s failure or refusal to issue it with a license under the Act or to communicate whether its licensing application has been refused for a period of two years and ten months is a violation of its constitutional right to administrative action that is expeditious, efficient, lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair.  “This could lead to the collapse of the business and the loss of employment for over 3,000 employees,” argues the company in court documents.

Legitimate expectation

It is the firm’s case that it had a legitimate expectation that the Regulatory Authority would exercise its functions under section 30 of the Act and either issue a license to the firm if it has met the requirements set out or if the licensing application is refused, inform it of the grounds for refusal.

The security firm notes its an offence to operate  a private security organisation without a valid license.

“The respondent’s failure or refusal to process the licensing application has exposed the company to legal action and to loss of business as the applicant’s customers are concerned about being accused of engaging an unlicensed firm,” argued Ondieki in court documents.

Justice Ngaah while declining to grant the temporary orders noted that although the Regulator is alleged to have delayed in processing the said licence, there is no or no sufficient reason given why the Security firm did not move the court for leave at the earliest opportunity possible.

“For this reason, I will not certify the applicant’s application as urgent. …The prayer for interim relief at this stage is refused,” ruled the judge.