{
  "id": 1878763,
  "title": "Court declines to suspend 2pc SHA claims deduction over filing defect",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/08/19/court-declines-to-suspend-2pc-sha-claims-deduction-over-filing-defect",
  "topic": "health",
  "section": "Health & Medicine",
  "published": "2026-08-19T06:20:00.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Capital Business",
    "slug": "capital-business",
    "url": "https://capitalfm.africa/court-declines-to-suspend-2pc-sha-claims-deduction-over-filing-defect/"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "On August 19, 2026, the High Court in Vihiga, Kenya, decided not to suspend a 2 percent fee charged to healthcare providers by the Social Health Authority (SHA) due to a missing supporting affidavit in the petitioners' application. Justice R. Nyakundi stated that the court could not consider the request for interim orders because the Notice of Motion was not supported by a properly filed and sworn affidavit. The challenge was brought by Dr Magare Gikenyi Benjamin and Eliud Matindi, who argued that the fee lacked legal or statutory backing and had not been subject to public scrutiny. They also questioned the use of healthcare providers' funds and patient data associated with the levy, seeking an injunction to halt deductions and refund previously collected amounts. The judge acknowledged the case involved disputed factual issues, such as the timing and authority behind the fee's introduction, the role of Finsprint Limited, the exact amounts withheld, and the harm to healthcare providers. However, he emphasized that such details needed to be substantiated through sworn evidence, noting that assertions in a certificate of urgency or a motion's summary alone were insufficient. Consequently, the court directed the petitioners to submit a supporting affidavit and all related documents within seven days. They were also required to distribute the petition, motion, and related documents to all respondents and interested parties and submit an affidavit confirming the delivery. The matter was set to be revisited on August 18 to ensure compliance and establish further procedural guidelines. The decision was issued at the Vihiga High Court on August 14, 2026.",
  "summary": "Justice R. Nyakundi said the court could not consider the petitioners’ request for conservatory orders because the Notice of Motion was not accompanied by a properly filed and sworn supporting affidavit.",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}