Republic v National Land Commission; Lake Naivasha Riparian Association(Interested Party) Ex Parte Geoffrey Muhoro [2020] KEELC 1832 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's High Court quashed the National Land Commission's decision revoking a land title because only the Land Registrar—not the Commission—can revoke titles.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the respondent’s determination revoking the applicant’s title was ultra vires
Yes - the Commission exceeded its jurisdiction by purporting to revoke a title (and allocations resulting in title), whereas Section 14(5) only empowers it to direct the Registrar to revoke
Section 14(5) of the National Land Commission Act is mandatory: where the Commission finds a title was unlawfully acquired, it shall direct the Registrar to revoke the title. The Commission itself has no revocation power. The respondent knew the applicant held a leasehold title, so it was dealing with a title, not a mere allocation. Its claim that it only directed revocation is contradicted by the wording of its determination, which stated the allocations 'are revoked'.
Whether an order of prohibition is available
No - the determination was a past event and no evidence showed any intended further proceedings
Prohibition is directed at preventing continuing or future proceedings in excess of jurisdiction. The determination complained of was made on 22nd August 2016 and cannot be prohibited. No evidence showed the respondent intended further action on the suit property, so the relief was not available.
Scope of judicial review
Judicial review concerns the decision-making process, not the merits; the court made no finding on the validity of the applicant’s title
The court emphasized that it did not determine ownership or validity of the title, which remains an issue for ordinary civil suits. Judicial review examines only jurisdiction, fair hearing and relevant considerations, as the Court of Appeal held in the Amagoro Land Disputes Tribunal case.
Legal principles established
#- The National Land Commission has no power to revoke a title itself; under Section 14(5) of the National Land Commission Act it may only direct the Registrar to revoke a title found to have been acquired unlawfully
- A tribunal that exercises a jurisdiction it does not possess acts ultra vires and its decision is a nullity meriting certiorari
- An order of prohibition cannot issue against a decision already made; it only prevents the making of a decision
Court orders
#- 1.An order of certiorari is hereby issued, bringing into this court and quashing the respondent’s decision dated 22nd August 2016 which purported to revoke the ex parte applicant’s title to all that parcel of land known as LR. No. 22957/4.
- 2.Costs are awarded to the ex parte applicant and shall be borne by the respondent.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction of the High Court under the law of Kenya (certiorari and prohibition against a constitutional commission)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v National Land Commission; Lake Naivasha Riparian Association(Interested Party) Ex Parte Geoffrey Muhoro [2020] KEELC 1832 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Judicial Review Application (Notice of Motion dated 23rd September 2016). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/1832/eng@2020-07-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.