Fredrick Tureisa Lekesike v Iman Dahir & 3 others [2019] KEELC 3459 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that once land adjudication is finished and titles issued, claimants can go straight to court without using internal dispute processes that no longer exist.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the petitions were barred for failure to exhaust dispute resolution mechanisms under the Land Adjudication Act and for lack of consent under Section 30
The preliminary objections fail because the adjudication register for the Jirime Adjudication Section had become final, titles had been issued, and the dispute resolution mechanisms under the Act no longer existed.
Section 30 restricts civil suits concerning land in an adjudication section before the register becomes final, and Section 26 provides objection mechanisms. The court found from the Land Adjudication Officer's affidavit and the letter of finality that the register had been forwarded to the Chief Land Registrar and a title deed issued on 30th October 2013. With adjudication complete, the mechanisms under the Act had ceased, so requiring exhaustion would be futile. The authorities relied on by the respondents were distinguishable as they concerned unregistered land or parties who had not participated in objection proceedings.
Whether the authorities cited by the respondents on exhaustion of remedies applied to the present case
The cited cases were distinguishable: Arithi concerned unregistered community land with a stalled process, while the other cases involved petitioners who had not participated in objection proceedings under Section 26.
The court distinguished Arithi Self Help Grazing Group because there the land was unregistered community land and the adjudication process had stalled due to litigation, unlike the present case where adjudication was complete and titles issued. In John Masiantet Lolungiro and David Mtawali Kazungu Yaa, the courts were dealing with petitioners who had participated in objection proceedings, a crucial step under Section 26. Those factual matrices did not obtain here.
What is the correct definition of a preliminary objection
Adopting the classic Mukisa Biscuit formulation: a preliminary objection is a point of law which, if argued as a preliminary point, may dispose of the suit.
The court framed the applicable law by citing the well-settled Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Co. Ltd vs West End Distributors Ltd decision before assessing the Notices of Preliminary Objection filed by the 1st Respondent and by the 2nd to 4th Respondents, both raising the question of jurisdiction under the Land Adjudication Act.
Legal principles established
#- Once an adjudication register has become final, the dispute resolution mechanism under the Land Adjudication Act ceases and litigants cannot be sent back to a process which no longer exists.
- The exhaustion doctrine does not apply where the statutory dispute resolution mechanisms are no longer available because the adjudication process is complete.
Court orders
#- 1.The Preliminary Objections by the 1st Respondent and by the 2nd to 4th Respondents are dismissed
- 2.No orders as to costs on the dismissed Preliminary Objections
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles of the Constitution invoked by constitutional Petition regarding land parcel MARSABIT/JIRIME/1390; jurisdiction determined in relation to the Land Adjudication Act (Cap 284), Sections 26 and 30
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (3)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Ogaga (Suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of Turufena Kemunto Ogaga-Deceased) v Ogaga & 3 others[2022] KECA 1422 (KLR)16 Dec 2022
- Priscilla Murungi Njogu v John Phares Njeru & 4 others [2020] KEELC 119 (KLR)[2020] KEELC 119 (KLR)18 Nov 2020
- Priscilla Murungi Njogu v John Phares Njeru & 4 others [2020] KEELC 119 (KLR)[2020] KEELC 119 (KLR)18 Nov 2020applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Fredrick Tureisa Lekesike v Iman Dahir & 3 others [2019] KEELC 3459 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Petition No. 35 of 2015 (consolidated with Petition No. 34 of 2015). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/3459/eng@2019-03-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.