Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedELC Judicial Review No. 01 of 2020· [2021] KEELC 2132 (KLR)

Republic v Peter Mavindu Ngua & 6 others Ex-patre Muunguu Ngua Ndongoi & another [2021] KEELC 2132 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
2 September 2021
2,399 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~10 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court dismissed a land judicial review bid, confirming that missing the 60-day appeal deadline under the Land Adjudication Act is fatal, and that courts review process, not merits.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Ex-parte Applicants moved the Environment and Land Court at Makueni by Notice of Motion dated 21st July, 2020 under Order 53 Rules 1(1) and 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules, seeking leave for and orders of certiorari to quash the Deputy Commissioner Makueni County's decision of 23rd October, 2019 in Appeal 130 of 2015 and the Adjudication Officer's decisions on Objections 415 and 418; prohibition against the Resident Magistrate from hearing ELC No. 5 of 2020 and against interference with parcels Makueni/Iuani/2532 and Makueni/Iuani/422; and mandamus directing the Land Registrar not to issue, and to recall and cancel, a title for parcel Okia/Iuani/2532. The dispute concerned alleged fraudulent excision of land from the 1st Ex-parte Applicant's parcel. The 1st and 2nd Respondents and the 4th to 7th Respondents opposed, arguing judicial review concerns process, not merits, and that the Applicants exhausted but flouted the Land Adjudication Act procedure by filing their ministerial appeal about a year after the statutory 60-day period. The court, applying the Municipal Council of Mombasa and Ransa authorities, held that judicial review examines the decision-making process, not merits, that the Applicants were accorded a hearing before the Deputy County Commissioner, and that the 60-day requirement under Section 29(1) of the Land Adjudication Act is mandatory. The Notice of Motion was dismissed with costs to the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th Respondents.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the application met the threshold for judicial review orders of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus

Holding

The application was dismissed because the Ex-parte Applicants had been given a hearing before the Deputy County Commissioner and their complaint targeted the merits of the dismissal for lateness, not the decision-making process

Reasoning

The court noted the Applicants were appellants in the Minister's case and were given a hearing, calling a witness and cross-examining. Section 29(1) of the Land Adjudication Act requires an appeal within 60 days, and the Applicants filed approximately a year late. Whether the Minister should have allowed submissions on lateness goes to the merits, which judicial review does not entertain. The statutory 60-day requirement is mandatory.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not the merits of the decision itself; the court is not a court of appeal over the decision maker
  • The 60-day period for appealing to the Minister under Section 29(1) of the Land Adjudication Act is mandatory
  • Certiorari issues where a decision is made without or in excess of jurisdiction or where the rules of natural justice are not complied with

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Dismissal of the Notice of Motion application dated 21st July, 2020
  2. 2.Costs to the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th Respondents

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 53 Rules 1(1) and 4
  • Fair Administrative Action ActSection 7(2)
  • Law Reform Actnot specified
  • Land Adjudication ActSection 29(1) (and Section 26 referenced therein)

Cases cited (7)

  • Timotheo Makenge -Vs- Manunga Ngochi
    [2017] eKLR
  • Republic -Vs- The Commissioner of Domestic Taxes Ex-parte Fleur Investments Ltd
    [2020] eKLR
  • Kenya National Examination Council -Vs- Republic Ex-parte Geoffrey Gathenji Njoroge & 9 Others
    [1997] eKLR
  • Kenya Re-Insurance Corporation -Vs- National Land Commission
    [2018] eKLR
  • Municipal Council of Mombasa -Vs- Republic & Umoja Consultants Ltd
    Civil Appeal No. 185 of 2001
  • Municipal Council of Mombasa -Vs- Republic & Another
    [2002] eKLR
  • Ransa Company Ltd -Vs- Manoa Francesco & 2 Others
    [2015] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 53 Rules 1(1) and 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules; the Fair Administrative Action Act; the Law Reform Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Republic v Peter Mavindu Ngua & 6 others Ex-patre Muunguu Ngua Ndongoi & another [2021] KEELC 2132 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). ELC Judicial Review No. 01 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/2132/eng@2021-09-02

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