NAIROBI, Kenya —Students at the Kenya Institute of Management (KIM) have received a reprieve after the High Court dismissed an objection filed by the Technical and Vocational Education and Training Authority (TVETA), allowing the institution to continue operating under existing court orders.
The ruling, delivered on July 9, means the institute will remain open as the legal dispute over its accreditation and operating status continues before the courts.
Court Upholds Earlier Orders
In a notice issued after the ruling, KIM said the High Court dismissed TVETA’s objection and reaffirmed that the institution remains operational under orders previously issued by the court.
“The ruling affirms that the Kenya Institute of Management remains operational by virtue of the orders issued by the Honourable Court on 22nd April 2026,” the institute said.
KIM assured students, parents, staff and other stakeholders that learning activities and institutional operations would continue uninterrupted while the case proceeds through the judicial process.
“We wish to assure our stakeholders that we remain committed to serving them and will continue to operate in accordance with the Court’s directives as the matter proceeds through the judicial process,” the institution stated.
The institute also thanked its students, partners and stakeholders for their patience, trust and continued support during the ongoing legal battle, adding that any future developments would be communicated through its official channels.
Earlier Court Orders Blocked Closure
The latest ruling follows interim orders issued by the Milimani High Court on April 22 after KIM challenged TVETA’s decision to revoke its accreditation and shut down its campuses.
Justice Musyoka certified the matter as urgent and granted the institution leave to commence judicial review proceedings against the regulator.
The judge further ordered that the leave would operate as a stay, effectively suspending TVETA’s decision to revoke KIM’s accreditation and close its campuses until the case is heard and determined.
In issuing the orders, Justice Musyoka said he had considered the certificate of urgency, chamber summons, statutory statement, verifying affidavit and all supporting documents filed before the court.
The court also granted KIM permission to seek judicial review orders aimed at quashing TVETA’s decision while maintaining the temporary suspension of the closure directive pending determination of the substantive case.
The matter was later scheduled for mention on April 29 for further directions.
Why TVETA Revoked KIM’s Accreditation
TVETA has maintained that its enforcement action followed investigations which allegedly established that KIM was offering and issuing academic and professional qualifications without the necessary accreditation.
According to the regulator, the institution had originally been authorised to offer only programmes assessed and certified by the TVET Curriculum Development, Assessment and Certification Council (TVET-CDACC).
However, TVETA alleges that KIM later expanded its academic offerings to include programmes that had not received the required regulatory approval.
The authority further claims the institution violated Section 17(3) of the TVET Act by offering unapproved courses and issuing qualifications without legal authorisation.
In addition, TVETA has accused KIM of engaging trainers who allegedly lacked valid practising licences, contrary to Section 23(1) of the Act.
The regulator argues that the alleged breaches undermine quality assurance within Kenya’s Technical and Vocational Education and Training sector and pose risks to students, employers and the credibility of qualifications issued under the TVET system.
Case Still Pending Before the Court
Although the dismissal of TVETA’s objection allows KIM to continue operating, it does not determine the substantive dispute over the institution’s accreditation.
The High Court will still hear and determine KIM’s judicial review application challenging the regulator’s decision to revoke its accreditation and order the closure of its campuses.
Until that case is concluded, the court’s stay orders remain in force, allowing the institution to continue serving its students while the legal process runs its course.