Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment ( appeal filed 13/12/11 from CMCC Meru)· [2018] KEELC 2551 (KLR)

Godfrey Koome v Gladys M’ananga & 6 others [2018] KEELC 2551 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
28 June 2018
JKJ G Kemei
1,164 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's High Court ruled that Land Dispute Tribunals cannot decide who owns registered land, so their award in this Meru land case was void and set aside.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a second appeal on points of law concerning land parcel Ntima/Ntakira/4287. The Meru Central Land Dispute Tribunal on 1/10/2010 dismissed the claim and awarded the land to the Appellant. On appeal, the Eastern Province Land Dispute Appeals Tribunal on 18/11/11 allowed the appeal and reverted the land to the 1st Respondent and her husband M'Inanga Mirera to hold in trust for the family; the Chief Magistrate's Court Meru adopted that award on the same date. The Appellant appealed, contending the tribunals lacked jurisdiction and that the award was a nullity. The court noted anomalies: the 2nd-6th Respondents gave evidence before the tribunal but no order was made in their favour, and an application to enjoin Sarah Rintari as interested party was never conclusively determined. The sole issue was whether the tribunals acted without jurisdiction. Applying section 3(1) of the Land Disputes Tribunals Act, which confines tribunals to boundary disputes, claims to occupy or work land, and trespass, the court held the tribunals had dealt with ownership of registered land, a matter outside their statutory jurisdiction. Relying on Sir Ali Bin Salim v Shariff Mohamed Shatry and Macfoy v United Africa Co Ltd, the court held that awards made without jurisdiction are void nullities. The appeal was allowed, both tribunal awards and the Magistrate's Court adoption were set aside, the 2nd-6th Respondents and the interested party were struck out of the record, and costs were awarded against the 1st Respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction of Land Dispute Tribunals over ownership of registered land

Holding

Both the Meru Central Land Dispute Tribunal and the Eastern Province Appeals Tribunal lacked jurisdiction as they determined ownership of registered land, and their awards were nullities

Reasoning

Section 3(1) of the Land Disputes Tribunals Act confines tribunals to disputes over division or boundaries of land, claims to occupy or work land, and trespass. The suit land was registered and the evidence disclosed counterclaims pointing to ownership, a matter outside the statutory jurisdiction. Citing Sir Ali Bin Salim and Macfoy, awards made without jurisdiction are void nullities. Both tribunals were jointly and severally not clothed with jurisdiction, so their awards and the CMCC's adoption were set aside.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Land Dispute Tribunals have no jurisdiction over matters relating to ownership of registered land
  • A judgment or order rendered without jurisdiction is a nullity, void and of no effect
  • A void act is a nullity, incurably bad, and need not be set aside by a court order

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal be and is hereby allowed
  2. 2.The award made by the Meru Central Land Dispute Tribunal & the Provincial Land Dispute Tribunal Appeals Tribunal together with the adoption of the later award by the Chief Magistrate's Court be and is hereby set aside
  3. 3.The names of 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th & 6th Respondents and together with the interested party be and are hereby struck out of the record of this appeal
  4. 4.The 1st Respondent to pay the Appellant's costs in the appeal
  5. 5.The Appellant to pay the costs if any of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th & 6th Respondents together with those of interested party in this appeal
On appeal from
Chief Magistrate's Court Meru
null
Jurisdiction invoked
Second appeal on points of law from the Chief Magistrate's Court which adopted the award of the Eastern Province Land Dispute Appeals Tribunal (Land Disputes Tribunals Act)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Godfrey Koome v Gladys M’ananga & 6 others [2018] KEELC 2551 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in the judgment ( appeal filed 13/12/11 from CMCC Meru). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/2551/eng@2018-06-28

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