Parents move to court to block St. Philip Neri fee hike

Parents move to court to block St. Philip Neri fee hike

NAIROBI, Kenya, Jan 14 – A group of parents have moved to court seeking to block a controversial school fee hike at St. Philip Neri Primary School, arguing that the increase was implemented without proper consultation and violates their legal rights.

In an urgent application filed at the Kangundo Magistrate’s Court, the plaintiffs – Lawrence Omondi Ochieng, Silvester Augustine Akunda, Victor Rasugu, and Maureen Githinji – have requested temporary orders of injunction to prevent the school from enforcing the fee increase, which is set to take effect from Term I of 2025.

The parents claim that they were first informed about the fee hike on October 24, 2024, when the school released its new fee structure for the upcoming academic year.

However, they contend that the decision to raise the fees was made unilaterally, without adequate notice, and the required consultation with the Parents Teachers Association (PTA), as mandated by the Basic Education Act.

According to the parents, the failure to engage the PTA in the decision-making process violates the spirit of the law, which emphasizes transparency, collaboration, and parental involvement in school governance.

They claim that the school’s management overlooked the established practice of consulting the PTA, creating a legitimate expectation among parents that they would be included in such decisions.

In their application, the parents have requested the court to prevent the school from implementing the fee hike and discontinuing any student’s attendance based on the increased fees, until the case is fully heard and determined.

The plaintiffs assert that if the fees are raised without due process, it will cause them significant hardship and financial strain.

“Additionally, the Defendant’s unilateral decision in the fee increment disregards the duty of good faith as well as the duty to consult as it is an established practice of PTA participation in financial planning that creates a legitimate expectation of consultations which the Defendant failed to uphold in the circumstances,” read the court documents in part.