Republic v National Land Commission & 2 others Ex parte Dakane Abdulahi Ali [2019] KEELC 507 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Land Commission can investigate illegal public land grants, but only the Registrar of Titles can actually revoke a title, and courts may refuse to protect suspicious land.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the National Land Commission had jurisdiction to revoke the Ex-parte Applicant's title over L.R No. 209/19822
Although NLC invoked its mandate under Article 68(c)(v) and Section 14 of the NLC Act, its power is limited to investigating the propriety of the acquisition of public land and recommending appropriate redress; its determination to revoke the title itself was beyond its ambit and illegal.
The court traced NLC's mandate to Article 67 of the Constitution and Article 68(c)(v), which empowered Parliament to enact legislation for review of grants of public land. Section 14 of the NLC Act sets out the review procedure, and Section 15 provides that where a title was acquired unlawfully, NLC directs the Registrar of Titles to revoke the title. The court held that the law mandates NLC to stop at making a recommendation to the Registrar, and that a determination revoking title was beyond NLC's ambit and therefore illegal.
Whether the court should grant the discretionary reliefs of certiorari and prohibition
The court declined to grant the orders sought, having regard to the contention that the suit land is a riparian reserve and that the Applicant's title may well turn out to be public land, and also noting the finding that the Council lacked authority to allocate open spaces in Kimathi Estate.
The court noted the judicial review orders are discretionary. It considered the Court of Appeal decision in Kepha Maobe & 365 Others v Benson I. Mwangi and City Council of Nairobi, which found the Council had no carte blanche over the estate's open spaces, and the National Environment Tribunal's finding that the suit land formed part of the protected 30-metre riparian reserve with the Applicant's activities harmful to the environment. In light of these, the court declined to issue orders whose effect would be to validate the Applicant's title over what may be public land.
Legal principles established
#- The National Land Commission's power under the Constitution and the NLC Act to investigate the propriety of the acquisition of public land extends only to recommending appropriate redress to the Registrar; it cannot itself determine to revoke title.
- Public land is ring-fenced by constitutional and statutory provisions and cannot be freely allocated to favoured allottees.
- Judicial review orders are discretionary and may be declined in appropriate cases.
Court orders
#- 1.The court declined to grant the orders sought in the application dated 15/3/2018 (certiorari to quash the Gazette Notice dated 17/07/2017 and prohibition against the Respondents)
- 2.Each party will bear its own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction over the decision of the National Land Commission under Article 68(c)(v) of the Constitution and Sections 14 and 15 of the National Land Commission Act (No. 5 of 2012)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v National Land Commission & 2 others Ex parte Dakane Abdulahi Ali [2019] KEELC 507 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Judicial Review Suit No. 42 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/507/eng@2019-10-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.