Tatu City Limited & another v Ethics & Anti-Corruption Commission & another [2018] KEELC 504 (KLR)

Article 162(2)(b) and Section 13(2)(a) of the Environment and Land Court Act confer jurisdiction over disputes relating to land use, title, tenure, rates, rents and valuations. The letters sought Government caveats and requisition of documents affecting land registration, transactions, use and tenure, and restraints on land disposition are governed by Sections 68-78 of the Land Registration Act. Hence the court could consider the caveat issue, while investigations of criminality belong to the High Court.

At the leave stage an applicant must show sufficient interest, that they are affected by the decision, an arguable case with reasonable chance of success, and that the decision was taken by a public body. The Applicants showed the caveats would prejudice transactions on their land without a hearing contrary to Section 76(1) of the Land Registration Act. The stay is discretionary and meant to prevent the application being rendered nugatory; the letters' impact was not yet implemented, so a stay could issue.

Although the court found jurisdiction over the caveat issue, the 1st Respondent alleged it was investigating money laundering and tax evasion, which are criminal offences, and the Chief Justice's Practice Directions directed that such matters be heard in the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Division. Balancing this, and exercising its power under Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act to make orders necessary for the ends of justice, the court transferred the matter.

The 2nd Respondent objected that parties should not obtain official government documents not addressed to them and use them in court, citing Baseline Architect v NHIF. The court held the letters were in the public domain, addressed to public officers, and their contents were likely to affect the Applicants' interest over the suit properties, so the court could consider them.