High Court Strikes Out Petition Challenging KCB’s Decision Not to Renew MCSK’s License

The High Court has struck out a petition challenging the Kenya Copyright Board's decision not to renew the Music Copyright Society of Kenya's operating licence.

In a ruling delivered on January 21, 2026, by Justice Patrick Otieno at the High Court in Lodwar, the court upheld a preliminary objection raised by the Kenya Copyright Board, known as KECOBO, and declared that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter.

The petition was filed by Ibrahim Yusuf and Jalinga Ekai Alfred, acting on their own behalf and representing members of the Music Copyright Society of Kenya, commonly referred to as MCSK. They contested KECOBO's refusal to renew MCSK's licence as a collective management organisation for the 2025/2026 period. The petitioners argued that the decision was made unilaterally and without prior notice or a hearing, breaching MCSK's right to fair administrative action under Article 47 of the Constitution and the Fair Administrative Action Act. They also claimed it violated their right to property by halting royalty collection and distribution.

The court initially granted interim conservatory orders on an ex parte basis to preserve the status quo pending the petition's determination.

However, Justice Otieno ruled that the core issue involved a challenge to KECOBO's refusal to renew or grant a certificate of registration to a collective management organisation. Such disputes fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the specialised Copyright Tribunal, as provided in Section 48(4)(b)(i) of the Copyright Act. The judge described the petition as a disguised appeal against the Board's administrative decision, even though it was framed in constitutional terms. The remedies sought, including orders of certiorari and mandamus to compel licence issuance or reinstatement, would effectively achieve the same outcome as an appeal to the Tribunal.

The court further noted that the licence in question had already expired, rendering the dispute moot in certain respects. Reinstating an expired annual licence through judicial intervention, without following statutory renewal processes, would be inappropriate.

The ruling emphasised the doctrine of exhaustion of remedies, requiring parties to pursue available administrative avenues before approaching the courts. The Copyright Tribunal possesses the specialised expertise to handle technical copyright and licensing matters.

As a result, the High Court struck out the entire petition for want of jurisdiction and issued no order as to costs. The dispute must now be pursued before the Copyright Tribunal if the parties choose to proceed. This decision aligns with previous rulings on similar challenges involving MCSK and KECOBO.