Valentine Ajiambo Tebino v Chief Land Registrar & another; Anderson Kigamba Waiyaki (Interested Party) [2021] KEELC 654 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court-style Environment and Land Court ordered Kenya's Chief Land Registrar to release a landowner's title documents within 30 days after holding their withholding violated constitutional rights.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Violation of the right to property under Article 40
The 1st Respondent's failure to release the Petitioner's duly registered documents violated her right to property
The Petitioner obtained an official search on 20th August 2020 confirming she was the registered proprietor and that the charge to Consolidated Bank Limited had been registered. Despite electronic confirmation on 22nd July 2020 that registration was successful, the 1st Respondent declined to release the documents without justification, and offered no explanation having filed no response to the petition.
Violation of the right to fair administrative action under Article 47
Withholding the documents without reason breached Article 47(1) and the duty to give written reasons under Article 47(2)
Relying on the Judicial Service Commission v Mbalu Mutava decision, the court held that Article 47(1) imports and subsumes common-law rules of natural justice. Citing Korir J and Majanja J, the court found that silence cannot be a substitute for written reasons, and that the 1st Respondent, having failed to respond or explain, contravened Article 47(1) and 47(2) as read with Section 4 of the Fair Administrative Action Act.
Entitlement to damages
The prayer for general, exemplary and aggravated damages failed for lack of evidence against the named officer
Although the Petitioner singled out Registrar Choka Berita Andeyo as withholding the documents, no material or correspondence between that officer and the Petitioner's advocates was exhibited to confirm the allegation. The court therefore declined compensation despite finding the constitutional violations established.
Legal principles established
#- Every person has the right to administrative action that is expeditious, efficient, lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair
- The giving of written reasons where a person's right is adversely affected by administrative action is a constitutional imperative
- A legitimate expectation that registered documents will be released arises from the public body's own confirmation of registration
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that the Petitioner's fundamental rights and freedoms under Article 40(1), 47(1) and 47(2) of the Constitution were grossly contravened and infringed by the 1st Respondent
- 2.An order of mandamus compelling the 1st Respondent to within thirty (30) days unconditionally release the duly registered discharge of charge, transfer, charge and original title deed for Title No. Dagoretti/Riruta/T.738 to the firm of M/s Makori & Karimi Advocates
- 3.An order of prohibition directed at the 1st Respondent, its agents, officers and any person acting under it from adversely interfering with the Petitioner's proprietary interest in Title No. Dagoretti/Riruta/T.738
- 4.Each party to bear their own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 40, 47 and 23(3) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010; Fair Administrative Action Act, No. 4 of 2015
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Valentine Ajiambo Tebino v Chief Land Registrar & another; Anderson Kigamba Waiyaki (Interested Party) [2021] KEELC 654 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). ELC Petition No E015 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/654/eng@2021-11-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.