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 application - Notice of Motion dated 12th April 2017· [2018] KEELC 1074 (KLR)

Republic v Chief Land Registrar & another Ex-parte Yosabia Kerubo Manyura [2018] KEELC 1074 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
26 October 2018
JMJ. M. Mutungi
2,856 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan High Court confirmed that a Land Registrar cannot cancel your title deed — only a court can order that.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The ex parte applicant sought judicial review orders of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the Kisii County Land Registrar, who on 11th January 2017 cancelled her title to LR No. Kisii Wanjare/Bogiakumu/1660 and reverted the property to the deceased original owner. The applicant had been registered as proprietor on 8th July 2002 following a gift transfer from her grandmother, Gesare w/o Nyaana, the first registered owner (registered 27th April 1976), who died on 14th June 2007. The Registrar relied on arbitral proceedings before the Deputy County Commissioner of 1st September 2016, which resolved that the land revert to its original status to enable succession, and placed a restriction on the title. The Registrar contended no succession had been undertaken to facilitate the applicant's registration and questioned the transfer. The court reviewed the documents, including the transfer, title deed, green card and death certificate, and found the applicant was properly registered during the grandmother's lifetime. The court held that Section 79 of the Land Registration Act limits the Registrar's rectification powers to errors not materially affecting a proprietor's interests, and that only the court under Section 80(1) may direct cancellation of a registration. The Registrar therefore acted without jurisdiction and ultra vires, with no due process followed, and his acceptance of the arbitral proceedings as authority to cancel was erroneous. The Notice of Motion dated 12th April 2017 was allowed: certiorari quashed the cancellation; prohibition issued against further dealings with the register; mandamus issued directing removal of entry No. 6 and restoration of the applicant as registered owner. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Land Registrar had jurisdiction to cancel the applicant's title

Holding

The Land Registrar acted ultra vires and without jurisdiction in cancelling the title; cancellation of a registered proprietor's title is a matter for the court under Section 80(1) of the Land Registration Act, 2012

Reasoning

Section 79 of the Land Registration Act confines the Registrar's rectification powers to formal matters, consensual rectification, resurvey corrections and updating particulars - none of which permits cancelling a title. Cancellation materially affects a proprietor's interests and, absent the proprietor's consent, fraud or injustice under Section 79(2), can only be ordered by the court under Section 80(1). Acting on arbitral proceedings before the Deputy County Commissioner, the Registrar exceeded his mandate, rendering his decision amenable to certiorari.

p. 4
02

Whether due process was followed before the title was cancelled

Holding

No due process was followed; the Registrar could only cancel the title if ordered to do so by the court, and his only lawful option was a restriction pending judicial determination

Reasoning

Having found the Registrar lacked jurisdiction, the cancellation was necessarily without due process. The Registrar's error lay in treating the arbitral proceedings before the Deputy County Commissioner as conferring authority to cancel a registered title. The applicant, as transferee from the registered owner during the owner's lifetime (she died in 2007, evidenced by the death certificate), was properly registered and her title could not be revoked without due process.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A Land Registrar's power of rectification under Section 79 of the Land Registration Act does not extend to cancelling the title of a registered proprietor; only the court may order cancellation under Section 80(1)
  • A Land Registrar's rectification powers are limited to errors, mistakes or omissions that do not materially affect the interests of a proprietor

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order of certiorari to issue quashing the decision of the Kisii County Land Registrar dated 11th January 2017 cancelling the ex parte applicant's title
  2. 2.An order of prohibition prohibiting the respondents, especially the 2nd respondent, from registering any transactions in the register of LR No. Kisii Wanjare/Bogiakumu/1660 or interfering with the register
  3. 3.An order of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to remove entry No. 6 in the register of LR No. Kisii Wanjare/Bogiakumu/1660 and restore the ex parte applicant's name as sole owner
  4. 4.Each party to bear their own costs of the application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Land Registration Act, 2012 (No. 3 of 2012)Sections 14, 24, 25, 26, 79, 80(1), 80(2)
  • Registered Land Act (as amended)Sections 14, 24, 25, 26, 79 (as cited by the applicant)
Jurisdiction invoked
Judicial review jurisdiction of the High Court (supervisory jurisdiction over administrative bodies); leave granted on 4th April 2017

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (2)

#

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, "Republic v Chief Land Registrar & another Ex-parte Yosabia Kerubo Manyura [2018] KEELC 1074 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Judicial Review application - Notice of Motion dated 12th April 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/1074/eng@2018-10-26

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