Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedMakuyu LDT No CMCC No DO 45 of 2010 (appeal)· [2019] KEELC 362 (KLR)

Stephen Wamai Gatau v Nelson Njuguna Gitau & Wamai Njuguna (Environment & Land Case 4 of 2018) [2019] KEELC 362 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
19 December 2019
JKJ.G. Kemei
891 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court voided a Land Dispute Tribunal's decision because tribunals cannot decide wills or transfer land title—only succession courts can.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an appeal to the Environment and Land Court at Murang'a against the decision of the Makuyu Land Dispute Tribunal in CMCC No DO 45 of 2010, transferred into the ELC pursuant to the Chief Justice's practice directions following the repeal of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act. On 6 April 2010 the Tribunal ruled that parcel Makuyu/Makuyu Block 1/972, registered in the name of the Appellant, belonged to Gitau's family and should be divided into three portions among the two sons and the mother according to the late Mr Gitau's will. The Appellant, one of the siblings, contended that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction: it adjudicated on a will, dealt with title to land by ordering subdivision, and had no mandate over claims founded on trust, contrary to section 3(1) of the repealed Land Disputes Tribunal Act, which confined Tribunals to division or boundary disputes, claims to occupy or work land, and trespass. The Respondents argued the Tribunal dealt with subdivision and occupation of family land within its mandate and that its decision was fair. The Court held that the Tribunal's order amounted to a disposition of title in land, a power it did not possess, and that it should have referred the matter to the succession court. Applying the Owners of Motor Vessel 'Lilians' v Caltex principle that jurisdiction is everything, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Tribunal's decision in its entirety, and awarded costs of the appeal to the Appellant, payable by the Respondents.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction of the Land Dispute Tribunal under section 3(1) of the repealed Land Disputes Tribunal Act

Holding

The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate on a will and to order subdivision amounting to disposition of title in land; it should have referred the matter to the succession court

Reasoning

Section 3(1) limited the Tribunal to disputes over division/boundaries of land, claims to occupy or work land, and trespass. The dispute before it was based on a will and involved trust and title to registered land. Ordering subdivision of the registered parcel into three portions amounted to disposition of title, a mandate the Tribunal did not possess. The Tribunal should have stopped and referred the matter to the succession court.

p. 2
02

Consequence of a tribunal acting without jurisdiction

Holding

The proceedings and decision are null and void and are set aside in their entirety

Reasoning

Relying on the Owners of Motor Vessel 'Lilians' v Caltex Oil principle, jurisdiction is everything; without it a court must down its tools. Since the Tribunal exceeded its statutory mandate, the only relief available was to declare the proceedings null and void, and the appeal against its decision succeeds.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Jurisdiction is conferred by the Constitution and/or legislation and cannot be arrogated by a court or party
  • Where a tribunal acts in excess of jurisdiction, the proceedings and decision are null and void

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Appeal allowed
  2. 2.Decision of the Land Dispute Tribunal set aside in its entirety
  3. 3.Costs of the Appeal payable by the Respondents

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Land Disputes Tribunal Act (repealed)section 3(1) (and s.3 a)-c))
  • Land Disputes Tribunal Act (repealed)section 2 (establishment of Tribunals, as referenced)

Cases cited (1)

  • The Owners of Motor Vessel "Lilians" Vs Caltex Oil Kenya Limited
    (1989) KLR
On appeal from
Land Dispute Tribunal (Makuyu), via Provincial Appeals Board
Makuyu LDT No CMCC No DO 45 of 2010
Jurisdiction invoked
Appeal from Land Disputes Tribunal proceedings transferred to the ELC following repeal of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act and the Chief Justice's practice directions of 25/7/2014

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Stephen Wamai Gatau v Nelson Njuguna Gitau & Wamai Njuguna (Environment & Land Case 4 of 2018) [2019] KEELC 362 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Makuyu LDT No CMCC No DO 45 of 2010 (appeal). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/362/eng@2019-12-19

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