Republic v Eastern Province Land Disputes Appeals Committee & another Ex-parte Zachary Muthamia M’Mwitari [2018] KEELC 1999 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court quashed a Land Disputes Tribunal award because tribunals have no power to decide who owns registered land.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction of the Land Disputes Tribunal over registered land
The Tribunal and the Appeals Committee acted ultra vires by awarding registered land to the interested party, as their mandate under Section 3(1) of the Land Disputes Tribunals Act covers only boundary disputes, claims to occupy or work land, and trespass.
The court noted it was not denied that the suit land was registered and that implementation of the award would involve cancelling the applicant's title. Applying Beatrice M'Marete and M'Timitu M'Mithirwa, the court held that any decision exceeding the Section 3(1) criteria is ultra vires and a nullity ab initio, whether made by the Tribunal or on appeal by the Appeals Committee.
Whether the ex parte applicant's acquiescence in the Tribunal's award in his favour precluded the challenge
The applicant could not be faulted for not challenging the original Tribunal decision, which had favoured him; the impugned decision was that of the Appeals Committee.
The interested party argued the applicant submitted to the Tribunal's jurisdiction by not challenging the award in his favour. The court held that since the applicant never initiated that dispute and the decision did not go against him, he could not be accused of complacency; the jurisdictional defect attached to the Appeals Committee's award.
Legal principles established
#- A Land Disputes Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear and determine issues relating to title to or possession of land registered under the Registered Land Act; any such award is a nullity ab initio.
- It is the registration status of the land at the time of the tribunal award, not the subsequent repeal of the governing statute, that governs the jurisdiction question.
Court orders
#- 1.Preliminary order that the respondent be described as the 'Eastern Province Land Disputes Appeals Committee' instead of 'Eastern Province Provincial Appeals Tribunal'
- 2.An order of certiorari calling up and quashing the Award of the Eastern Provincial Appeals Committee Case No. 61 of 2010 read in court on 21/1/2011 in Meru CMCC LDT No. 6 of 2010
- 3.The respondent and the interested party to bear the costs of the proceedings
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 53 Rules 3(1),(2),(3) and (4) of the Civil Procedure Rules (Cap 21) and Sections 8 and 9 of the Law Reform Act (Cap 26)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Eastern Province Land Disputes Appeals Committee & another Ex-parte Zachary Muthamia M’Mwitari [2018] KEELC 1999 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Meru CMCC Judicial Review (Notice of Motion dated 31/3/2011). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/1999/eng@2018-08-01
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.