Alice Anyanzwa v Khwisero Land Disputes Tribunal & 2 others [2018] KEELC 702 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court quashed a land tribunal's decision because the tribunal no longer existed in law when it made it.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Khwisero Land Disputes Tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain the boundary dispute
The dispute being one of boundaries, the tribunal under section 3 of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act would ordinarily have had jurisdiction to entertain it.
The court examined section 3 of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act (now repealed), which vested in tribunals jurisdiction over civil disputes as to division or determination of boundaries of land, claims to occupy or work land, and trespass to land. On perusal of the documents, the dispute appeared to be one of boundaries, so the tribunal would have had jurisdiction on that basis. Jurisdiction, however, was not the dispositive issue.
Whether the tribunal existed in law at the material time it purported to make its decision
The tribunal was legally non-existent at the time of its purported decision, rendering the decision a nullity; the court adopted the applicant's submissions on this point.
The Land Disputes Tribunal Act had been repealed, and powers over land disputes were vested in the Environment and Land Court under Article 162(1) of the Constitution and the Environment and Land Court Act, No. 19 of 2011, which came into force on 30/8/2012. The applicant argued, and the court concurred, that the tribunal was legally non-existent and without jurisdiction at the material time. The application was unopposed by the respondents, the interested party having been served but neither attending nor filing submissions. Certiorari and prohibition were therefore granted.
Legal principles established
#- To succeed in judicial review, an applicant must show the decision is tainted with illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety.
- Judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not the merits of the decision.
- Judicial review orders are discretionary and not guaranteed even where the case falls within a recognised category.
- Under Article 162(1) and the Environment and Land Court Act, powers to arbitrate over and determine disputes over land are vested in the Environment and Land Court.
Court orders
#- 1.An order of certiorari to remove into the court and quash the purported and undated decision of the alleged Khwisero Land Disputes Tribunal filed in Butere SRMC Civil Case No. 74 of 2010 on 20/3/2012 and adopted on 7/5/2012 over L.R. No. Kisa/Khushiku/289
- 2.An order of prohibition against the interested party and his agents, employees, representatives or any persons acting on his instruction from implementing or effecting the said purported decision
- 3.Costs of the application to the applicant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 53 (pleaded as Order 54 rule 1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 and the Law Reform Act, Cap 26; Article 162(1) of the Constitution and the Environment and Land Court Act, No. 19 of 2011
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Alice Anyanzwa v Khwisero Land Disputes Tribunal & 2 others [2018] KEELC 702 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). ELC JR. Case No. 4 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/702/eng@2018-11-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.