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· [2018] KEELC 2633 (KLR)

Charles Kariithi Warui v Mary Wangu Ndandu [2018] KEELC 2633 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
5 July 2018
LWL N Waithaka
1,410 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Land tribunals in Kenya never had power to decide who owns registered land, so any such award can be overturned by the High Court.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an appeal to the High Court at Nyeri against the award of the Land Disputes Appeals Committee, Central, read on 3rd November 2010, which upheld an award of the Mathira District Lands Dispute Tribunal directing that parcel Iriani/Kairia/234, registered in the appellant's name, be transferred to the respondent as the 'rightful heir' and that her children join her in occupying the land. The appeal was disposed of by written submissions. Two issues fell for determination: whether the appeal was time-barred, and whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction over a dispute touching title to registered land. On the first issue, the court, relying on Chege Macharia and Benson Maina Thiongo, held that the right of appeal accrues when the judgment is read and overruled the time-bar objection. On the second, and dispositive, issue, the court adopted Joseph Malakwen Lelei, holding that Section 3 of the repealed Land Disputes Tribunal Act confers jurisdiction only over boundary disputes, claims to occupy or work land and trespass, not determination of title to or ownership of registered land. Since the dispute necessarily turned on ownership of the registered parcel, and the award effectively ordered transfer of the appellant's land, the Tribunal and the Appeals Committee acted without jurisdiction. Ground five of the appeal was abandoned as a typographical error. The appeal was allowed as prayed, though the judgment records no express order as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Time bar - whether the appeal was filed out of time

Holding

The appeal was competent; judicial notice was taken of the practice of notifying parties of the right of appeal only when the judgment was read, and the right of appeal accrues on reading of the judgment

Reasoning

Section 8(1) of the repealed Act required appeals within 30 days of the decision. The court took judicial notice that elders notified parties of their right of appeal after judgment was read, and relied on Chege Macharia for the proposition that the right of appeal accrues after judgment is read, not from the date of the award. Benson Maina Thiongo confirmed that the timelines do not take away the right of appeal to the High Court.

p. 3
02

Jurisdiction of the Land Disputes Tribunal over title to registered land

Holding

The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because the dispute necessarily turned on ownership of registered land, which Section 3 of the repealed Act did not confer

Reasoning

The dispute before the Tribunal was in substance a contest over ownership of the registered parcel Iriani/Kairia/234: the respondent claimed to be the rightful owner, the appellant relied on his registration. Adopting Joseph Malakwen Lelei, the court held that Section 3 of the repealed Act covers only boundary division, claims to occupy or work land and trespass, not determination of title. The award, which ordered transfer of the parcel, was therefore made without jurisdiction.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Land Disputes Tribunals under the repealed Act had no jurisdiction to determine title to or ownership of registered land
  • The right of appeal accrues after the judgment/award is read, not from the date of the award

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The objection on the alleged time bar is overruled and the appeal is declared competent
  2. 2.The appeal is allowed as prayed, the Tribunal and Appeals Committee having acted without jurisdiction

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Land Disputes Tribunal Act (repealed)Section 3(1)
  • Land Disputes Tribunal Act (repealed)Section 7(1) and (2)
  • Land Disputes Tribunal Act (repealed)Section 8(1)
  • Land Disputes Tribunal Act (repealed)Section 8(9)

Cases cited (3)

  • Joseph Malakwen Lelei & Another V. Rift Valley Land Dispute Appeals Committee & 2 others
    (2014) eKLR
  • Chege Macharia v. Francis Kimani Kirimira
    (2015) eKLR
  • Benson Maina Thiongo V. Joseph Waweru Mwangi
    (2006) eKLR
On appeal from
Senior Resident Magistrate's Court
Not stated in the judgment
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 8(9) of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act (repealed) - appeal from the Tribunal process as adopted by the Senior Resident Magistrate

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Charles Kariithi Warui v Mary Wangu Ndandu [2018] KEELC 2633 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/2633/eng@2018-07-05

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