Kajoi (Legal representative of Geoffrey Kajoi Akwalu) v Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer (Igembe Settlement Officer) & another
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal ruled that a land officer stripped a farmer of 4.5 acres without a proper hearing, and the case must now be reheard.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Applicable statute governing the adjudication of Parcel No. 3278
The parcel was not trust land; the Land Consolidation Act, not the Land Adjudication Act, applied.
The two Acts apply to different types of land: the Land Consolidation Act to land in special areas and the Land Adjudication Act to trust land. Neither the pleadings nor the affidavits described the parcel as trust land, and there was no evidence of community land, so only the Land Consolidation Act could govern.
Whether the Land Adjudication Officer acted with jurisdiction and in accordance with due process
The impugned letter did not disclose compliance with the statutory complaint procedure; the investigation and decision were made without constituting the committee and without hearing the appellant.
Under section 26 of the Land Consolidation Act, complaints against the adjudication register must be considered by the Adjudication Officer with the Committee. The letter of 29th April 2009 gave no information on who carried out the investigation, mentioned no committee involvement, and the appellant was not heard before losing 4.5 acres.
Whether the learned Judge properly exercised his discretion in refusing judicial review orders
He did not; he failed to identify the applicable statute and statutory provisions, was swayed by the merits, and failed to consider relevant factors including whether the appellant was heard.
The Judge did not specify under which Act the adjudication was conducted, cited no specific statutory provisions, and appeared swayed by the merits by holding the appellant had not impeached the DLASO's reasons. He failed to interrogate the public duty, the propriety of the process, and whether the appellant was properly heard.
Legal principles established
#- An appellate court will not interfere with a discretionary judgment on judicial review unless the judge misdirected himself, misapprehended the facts, took into account irrelevant or failed to take into account relevant considerations, or the decision is plainly wrong.
- Judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not the merits of the decision.
- Certiorari will issue where a decision is made without or in excess of jurisdiction or in breach of the rules of natural justice.
- In land adjudication, the court's role is supervisory only; it cannot usurp the functions of the Land Adjudication Officer or statutory bodies.
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal allowed
- 2.Judgment of the trial court set aside
- 3.Appellant's motion for judicial review orders placed before a judge of competent jurisdiction (other than Njoroge, J.) for rehearing
- 4.Costs of the appeal awarded to the appellant
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Meru (Environment and Land Court)
- ELC No. 73 of 2009
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over the judgment of the High Court (Environment and Land Court) in judicial review proceedings
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kajoi (Legal representative of Geoffrey Kajoi Akwalu) v Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer (Igembe Settlement Officer) & another", Case Analysis (2022). Civil Appeal 99 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2022/802/eng@2022-07-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.