Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedJudicial Review (Notice of Motion dated 23rd September 2015)· [2016] KEELC 433 (KLR)

Joseph Kirugu Njuguna v Land District Tribunal Maragua & 2 others [2016] KEELC 433 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
11 October 2016
LWL N Waithaka
1,146 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's High Court confirmed that Land Disputes Tribunals cannot decide who owns registered land, and quashed a tribunal award that tried to do exactly that.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The ex parte applicant, Joseph Kiragu Njuguna, sought leave-granted judicial review orders of prohibition and certiorari against the Chief Magistrates Court Murang'a and the Maragua Land Dispute Tribunal in respect of an award over L.R LOC.2/Makomboki/1083, a parcel of which he was the registered proprietor. He contended the Tribunal's award, which required surrender of a portion of the land to the interested party, was ultra vires the Tribunal's powers under section 3 of the Land Disputes Tribunals Act and had the effect of revoking a grant in a succession cause. The interested party, William Mburu Mungai, opposed, asserting the applicant held the land in trust for the children of Simon Mungai Mutiti (deceased) and that the award was duly made and confirmed. The 1st and 2nd respondents' grounds of opposition were withdrawn. The court found the applicant was the registered proprietor when the Tribunal deliberated and, adopting Republic v Chairman, Lurambi Land Dispute Tribunal and Mateo Githua Ngurukie, held that Land Disputes Tribunals lack jurisdiction over title to registered land. Applying Kenya National Examination Council v Republic exparte Gathenji Njoroge on certiorari for excess of jurisdiction, the court quashed the Tribunal's award and consequential orders, allowed the application as prayed, and, noting the interested party's genuine belief in the Tribunal's jurisdiction, directed each party to bear their own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction of Land Disputes Tribunals over registered land

Holding

The Tribunal acted without jurisdiction and ultra vires its statutory powers by determining a dispute concerning title to registered land

Reasoning

The court found as a fact that the ex parte applicant was the registered proprietor of the suit land when the Tribunal deliberated. Relying on Republic v Chairman, Lurambi Land Dispute Tribunal and Mateo Githua Ngurukie, it held that section 3(1) of the Land Disputes Tribunals Act does not empower Tribunals to determine title to registered land. The award, which effectively required surrender of part of the registered parcel, was therefore ultra vires and liable to be quashed.

p. 2
02

Availability of certiorari where a decision is made in excess of jurisdiction

Holding

Certiorari issues to quash an ultra vires Tribunal award; the applicant established a case for the order

Reasoning

Applying Kenya National Examination Council v Republic ex parte Geoffrey Gathenji Njoroge, the court held that certiorari will issue where a decision is made without or in excess of jurisdiction or in breach of natural justice. Since there was no dispute that the Tribunal lacked power over the registered-land dispute, certiorari issued to remove and quash the award and consequential orders.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Land Disputes Tribunals have no jurisdiction to determine issues affecting title to registered land; such awards are ultra vires section 3(1) of the Land Disputes Tribunals Act
  • An order of certiorari will issue where a decision is made without or in excess of jurisdiction or in breach of natural justice

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Order of certiorari issued to remove to the High Court and quash the award and proceedings of the Maragua Land Dispute Tribunal in respect of LR LOC.2/Makomboki/1083 and any consequential orders
  2. 2.Each party to bear their own costs of the application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Land Disputes Tribunals ActSection 3(1)

Cases cited (3)

  • Republic v. Chairman, Lurambi Land Dispute Tribunal & 2 others
    (2006) eKLR
  • Mateo Githua Ngurukie vs. Hon. Attorney General and 5 Others
    Nyeri High Court Civil Suit No. 206 of 1999
  • Kenya National Examination Council V Republic Ex parte Geoffrey Gathenji Njoroge and others
    Civil Appeal No.266 of 1996
Jurisdiction invoked
Judicial review jurisdiction under order of certiorari and prohibition following leave granted on 22nd September 2015

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Joseph Kirugu Njuguna v Land District Tribunal Maragua & 2 others [2016] KEELC 433 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Judicial Review (Notice of Motion dated 23rd September 2015). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2016/433/eng@2016-10-11

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.