County Government of Uasin Gishu v Attorney General & 20 others [2019] KEELC 503 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court refused to strike out a land suit, ruling the Inter-Governmental Relations Act only applies to disputes between governments, not private parties.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Intergovernmental Relations Act, 2012 ousts the court's jurisdiction over the suit
The preliminary objection fails because the suit does not fall under the Intergovernmental Relations Act; it is not an intergovernmental dispute since it involves private parties and an interested party whose rights cannot be determined under the Act's mechanisms
Article 189(3) requires governments to make every reasonable effort to settle disputes, including through national legislation, and the IGRA was enacted under Article 189(4). However, the court, guided by the Isiolo County Assembly Service Board definition, found the dispute here involves individuals against whom orders are sought and an interested party, none of whom have standing or opportunity in the IGRA mechanisms. The suit therefore does not fall within Part IV of the Act.
What amounts to an intergovernmental dispute
An intergovernmental dispute must be between the two levels of government, not between a government and an individual, and a suit involving private parties falls outside the Act
Relying on Onguto J in the Isiolo County Assembly Service Board case, the court adopted the position that the dispute must be between the two levels of government and not between a government and an individual or person. The court applied this test to the present suit and found that the orders sought are against individuals and that an interested party's rights must also be determined, taking the matter outside the Act.
Legal principles established
#- Where a suit involves parties who are neither the national nor a county government, such that those parties cannot participate in the dispute resolution mechanisms under the Intergovernmental Relations Act, the dispute is not an intergovernmental dispute and the court's jurisdiction is not ousted
- Where there are laid down procedures for dispute resolution, they must be adhered to and exhausted before moving to the next level
Court orders
#- 1.The preliminary objection dated 8th December 2017 is dismissed (the court found the case does not fall under the Intergovernmental Relations Act and the preliminary objection must fail)
- 2.Parties to comply with Order 11 and fix the matter for hearing
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court; preliminary objection grounded on Articles 6(2), 189(3) and (4) of the Constitution and sections 30, 31, 33, 34 and 35 of the Inter-Governmental Relations Act, 2012
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "County Government of Uasin Gishu v Attorney General & 20 others [2019] KEELC 503 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Suit dated 24th August 2016 (case number not stated in the ruling). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/503/eng@2019-11-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.