M'Igweta alias Jadiel Karitho M"Igweta v District Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer Tigania District; M'Ethambu (Interested Party) (Judicial Review 13A of 2012) [2018] KEELC 1879 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A landowner challenging a land adjudication decision in Kenya lost because he skipped the required objection process and never got the adjudication officer's consent to sue.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Exhaustion of statutory objection mechanism
The exparte applicant failed to demonstrate that he lodged a written objection with the adjudication officer within sixty days as required by the Land Adjudication Act and Land Consolidation Act
Sections 17 and 26 of the respective statutes require any person named in or affected by the adjudication register who considers it incorrect or incomplete to object in writing within sixty days of publication of the notice of completion. The applicant did not show he expressed his grievance to the adjudication officer in writing within that period, nor in what respect the register was incorrect or incomplete.
Consent required to institute proceedings over land under adjudication
It was imperative for the exparte applicant to seek and obtain the adjudication officer's consent under section 8 read with section 30 before instituting proceedings, which he did not
The subject matter is a parcel of land under adjudication. The Land Consolidation Act and Land Adjudication Act require consent of the adjudication officer before instituting court proceedings touching on land under adjudication. The applicant did not attach a copy of such consent, rendering the application fatally defective.
Scope of judicial review under Article 165(6)
Judicial review is concerned with process, not merit review of the decision
The court, citing Isack Osman v IEBC and Municipal Council of Mombasa v Republic, held that review under Article 165(6) supervisory jurisdiction examines whether the decision-maker had jurisdiction, whether affected persons were heard, and whether relevant matters were considered - not the merits. Without the impugned decision and its proceedings, the court could not make that determination.
Legal principles established
#- Judicial review concerns itself with the decision-making process and not the merits of the decision
- A party aggrieved by an adjudication register must lodge an objection in writing within sixty days of publication of the notice of completion
Court orders
#- 1.The exparte applicant's substantive notice of motion is dismissed
- 2.Costs awarded to the respondent/interested party
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 165(6) of the Constitution (judicial review of administrative action)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "M'Igweta alias Jadiel Karitho M"Igweta v District Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer Tigania District; M'Ethambu (Interested Party) (Judicial Review 13A of 2012) [2018] KEELC 1879 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Judicial Review No 13A of 2012. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/1879/eng@2018-06-14
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.