Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedChamber Summons Application dated 12th November 2019· [2021] KEELC 1705 (KLR)

Iimbani Dispensary Project v Abdulrahaman Mohamed Abdi [2021] KEELC 1705 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
7 October 2021
2,906 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed National Land Commission compensation awards can be enforced like court decrees, though the winner only recovered land value, not improvements.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Applicant lodged a complaint before the National Land Commission concerning the allocation, alienation and registration of L.R. No. 209/10772 (now subdivided into L.R. Nos. 209/16432 and 209/16433) in favour of the Respondent. By a Recommendation dated 18th April 2018, gazetted on 9th November 2018, the Commission found the allocation irregular, unlawful and legally untenable, and recommended that the Respondent compensate the Applicant for the surrender of the suit properties subject to a valuation. The Respondent neither challenged the Recommendation in any judicial proceedings nor complied with it. The Applicant then filed a Chamber Summons dated 12th November 2019 seeking that the award be enforced in the same manner as a decree or order of the High Court, with costs. The Respondent, served by substituted means following advertisement in the Daily Nation, entered neither appearance nor defence, leaving the application unopposed. The court framed three issues: the Commission's jurisdiction, whether the award has the force of law, and whether it is enforceable as a decree. The court held that the Commission acted within its jurisdiction under Article 67 of the Constitution and Section 14 of the National Land Commission Act, 2012; that the Recommendation, being made by a constitutional commission, has the force of law and binds the parties; and that absent an express adoption provision, the court's inherent jurisdiction and Section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act permit adoption and enforcement. The application was allowed in terms of prayer 1, subject to the rider that compensation is limited to the value of the land and excludes improvements effected by the Respondent. The Applicant was awarded costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the National Land Commission had jurisdiction to review the allocation of the suit property and make the Recommendation

Holding

The Commission acted within its jurisdiction under Article 67 of the Constitution and Section 14 of the National Land Commission Act, 2012, which mandates it to review grants and dispositions of public land

Reasoning

The Commission is an independent constitutional commission established under Article 67 and operationalized by the National Land Commission Act, 2012. Section 14 empowers it to review grants or dispositions of public land, on its own motion or upon complaint, to establish their propriety or legality. The Applicant lodged a complaint concerning the alienation and allocation of the suit property; after hearing the parties, the Commission found the allocation irregular and unlawful and recommended compensation. The decision has never been challenged in any judicial proceedings, so the Commission acted within its mandate.

p. 3
02

Whether the award/Recommendation of the National Land Commission has the force of law

Holding

The Recommendation is a binding pronouncement with the force of law, creating rights and obligations enforceable in court, and cannot be treated as a mere sheet of paper

Reasoning

The National Land Commission is one of the independent constitutional commissions under Articles 248 and 249 of the Constitution. By virtue of its constitutional status, it was clothed with the mandate to make binding recommendations capable of enforcement under the law. Relying on the Court of Appeal decision in Commission on Administration of Justice v Kenya Vision 2030 Delivery Board, recommendations of constitutional commissions have the force of law and are amenable to enforcement by a court of law. The Recommendation herein binds the parties and creates rights and obligations actualizable through court proceedings.

p. 3
03

Whether the award is capable of being adopted and enforced as a decree of the court

Holding

The award is enforceable as a decree of the High Court notwithstanding the absence of an express adoption provision, by virtue of the court's inherent jurisdiction and Section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act

Reasoning

Neither Article 67 and 68 of the Constitution nor the National Land Commission Act, 2012 contains an express provision for adoption and enforcement of the Commission's recommendations. However, the absence of such an express provision does not bar the court from adopting and enforcing a binding recommendation with the force of law. Where an act is not expressly prohibited, and unless it relates to jurisdiction, it can be attended to pursuant to the court's inherent powers as explained in Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited v Benzene Holdings Limited, and under Section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act which empowers the court to make any order and grant any relief it deems fit and just.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Recommendations of constitutional commissions, including the National Land Commission, have the force of law and are enforceable by a court of law
  • The absence of an express statutory provision for adoption of a commission's recommendation does not bar the court from adopting and enforcing it, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Chamber Summons Application dated 12th November 2019 is allowed in terms of prayer 1 thereof - the National Land Commission award dated 18th April 2018 and gazetted on 9th November 2018 is to be enforced in the same manner as a decree or order of the High Court
  2. 2.The enforcement is subject to the rider that the Applicant is only entitled to compensation on account of the value of the land, but not the improvements thereto, the latter which were done by the Respondent
  3. 3.The Applicant is awarded costs of the subject Application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 67
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 68(c)(v) and Article 68(5)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 40, 47 and 60
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 248 and 249
  • National Land Commission Act, 2012Section 14
  • Environment and Land Court ActSection 13(7)

Cases cited (3)

  • Commission on Administration of Justice v Kenya Vision 2030 Delivery Board & 2 others
    (2019) eKLR
  • Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited v Benzene Holdings Limited t/a Wyco Paints
    [2016] eKLR
  • Meshallum Waweru Wanguku
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2) Constitution and Section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act (inherent power to make any order and grant any relief as the Court deems fit and just)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (1)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Iimbani Dispensary Project v Abdulrahaman Mohamed Abdi [2021] KEELC 1705 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Chamber Summons Application dated 12th November 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/1705/eng@2021-10-07

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.