Sisters of Notre Dame De Namur Registered Trustees v National Land Commission & 2 others; Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission(Interested Party) [2019] KEELC 4000 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A religious trust's fresh constitutional challenge to a revoked land title failed because the same ownership dispute had already been decided in an earlier Kenyan court case.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Res judicata
The petition is res judicata because ownership, possession and validity of title to the suit property were fully determined in Petition No. 30 of 2012 between the same Petitioner, the Attorney General and the Interested Party
The court compared the pleadings in both petitions and found the same suit property (Kisumu Municipality/Block 12/124 and House No. KISU/HOU/HG/80) and the same central issue of ownership had been litigated and decided on 29th May 2014. Although the National Land Commission and Chief Land Registrar were not parties to the earlier petition, the question of ownership was decided against the Petitioner, and Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act bars re-litigation of the same issue.
Validity of the Petitioner's title
No good title ever passed to the Petitioner because the seller's lease certificate was a forgery and the suit property was government land reserved for hospital staff residence
The court adopted the findings in Petition No. 30 of 2012, in which Kaniaru J found that Justin Kimutai Sirma's lease was a forgery, that the transaction was fraudulent (with a Land Registrar benefitting from the purchase money), and that the property was government land never available for alienation. Those findings bind the Petitioner until changed by a higher court.
Alleged violation of constitutional rights
No violation of Articles 40 or 47 was established because the Petitioner never had protectable property rights in the suit property
Since the Petitioner acquired no good title, its constitutional claim of arbitrary deprivation under Article 40 and violation of fair administrative action under Article 47 fails. The gazettement by the National Land Commission merely regularised ownership in conformity with the existing judgment and could not constitute a wrong against the Petitioner.
Status of the stay of the 29th May 2014 judgment
There is no order in force staying execution of the earlier judgment; the ex parte interim stay lapsed and reinstatement was not proved
Although the Petitioner deponed that interim stay orders had been extended, no extracted order or ruling was produced. Applying Section 107 of the Evidence Act, the court held the Petitioner failed to discharge its evidential burden, so the 2014 judgment stands unstayed.
Legal principles established
#- A claim over title, ownership and possession of land already determined by a court of competent jurisdiction is barred by res judicata and cannot be re-litigated in the form of a fresh constitutional petition
- Courts must guard against litigants introducing new causes of action to seek the same remedy already resolved by a competent court
- A party alleging reinstatement or extension of stay orders bears the burden of proving it; absent proof, the stay is taken to have lapsed
Court orders
#- 1.The petition is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the petition are awarded to the Interested Party who participated in its hearing
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 22, 23 of the Constitution of Kenya (enforcement of Bill of Rights), in the matter of alleged contravention of Articles 19, 22, 23, 40, 47, 50 and 64
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (4)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Awori v Attorney General & another (Constitutional Petition E001 of 2021) [2022] KEELC 2560 (KLR)[2022] KEELC 2560 (KLR)15 Jul 2022
- Awori v Attorney General & another (Constitutional Petition E001 of 2021) [2022] KEELC 2560 (KLR)[2022] KEELC 2560 (KLR)15 Jul 2022
- Isaack Samuel Kiramburi v Land Adj. And Settlement Officer Igembe & 4 others; James Kiritu & 2 others (Interested Parties) [2021] KEELC 4639 (KLR)[2021] KEELC 4639 (KLR)27 Jan 2021
- Isaack Samuel Kiramburi v Land Adj. And Settlement Officer Igembe & 4 others; James Kiritu & 2 others (Interested Parties) [2021] KEELC 4639 (KLR)[2021] KEELC 4639 (KLR)27 Jan 2021
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Sisters of Notre Dame De Namur Registered Trustees v National Land Commission & 2 others; Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission(Interested Party) [2019] KEELC 4000 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). ELC Petition Case No. 30 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/4000/eng@2019-04-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.