<p class="ql-align-center"><strong>RULING OF THE COURT</strong></p><p class="ql-align-justify">1. In his notice of Motion dated 18^th October, 2007 and brought under <em>Rules 1 (3), 39, 42</em> and <em>43 </em>of the Court of Appeal Rules (the Rules), the Applicant seeks leave to appeal to this court against the ruling of the High Court delivered on <em>9</em><em>^th</em><em> October, 2007 </em>by Nyamu, J (as he then was), Wendoh and Dulu, JJ in Nairobi H. C. Misc. Application No. 22 of 2004 (OS). He also seeks that the costs of this application be paid by the Respondents. The application is based on the grounds that the Applicant’s intended appeal is arguable and has overwhelming probability of success; that unless leave was at that time granted immediately some of the prayers in the OS would be overtaken by events thus rendering the intended appeal nugatory; that the ruling is unconstitutional, unjustified, and unreasonable as well as a clear manifestation of bias against the Applicant; that the Attorney General has not controverted the Applicant’s claim in the OS; that in flagrant violation of <em>Sectio…</em></p>