Michael Bett Siror & another v National Land Commission & another; Stephen Sugut & 12 others (Interested Parties) [2021] KEELC 3674 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court in Kitale dismissed a land dispute petition, ruling that ownership fights belong in ordinary civil suits, not constitutional petitions.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the instant petition has attained the threshold required of a constitutional petition
- 2.Whether any constitutional rights of the petitioners have been violated by the respondents
- 3.Who should bear the costs of this petition?
Key legal issues
#Whether the petition met the threshold of a constitutional petition
It did not; it is an ordinary civil dispute between the petitioners and the interested parties dressed as a constitutional claim
The dispute over the suit land has been litigated in ordinary civil suits between the petitioners and interested parties. The interested parties' claims and possible instigation of the titling render any government role a purely civil matter. Contentious issues of fact over entitlement to land require viva voce evidence in a suit by plaint, not affidavit-based petition proceedings.
Whether the petitioners' constitutional rights were violated
No violation of rights under the Constitution was proved or threatened
The respondents, particularly the Government as custodian of land records, denied interference with the petitioners' titles, and the court held that assertion by the Attorney General must be believed and adhered to. The alleged admissions by respondents were not discharged in proof. The claims belong in the pending private-law suits.
Legal principles established
#- Private law disputes over title to land do not attain the threshold of a constitutional petition and should be resolved by ordinary civil litigation
- A petitioner must demonstrate actual or threatened violation of the rights claimed for a constitutional petition to succeed
Court orders
#- 1.The petition is dismissed for lack of merit
- 2.The petitioners shall bear the costs of the petition
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 22(1) and 23(1) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010
Relief refused
#Orders of prohibition, declarations of lack of jurisdiction over private land, declarations of rights violations, permanent injunction, general and exemplary damages and indemnity costs
The petition was found to be a private law dispute improperly clothed as a constitutional petition, and no violation of rights was proved
Costs
The petitioners shall bear the costs of this petition
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Courts have in the past held that private law claims should not form the basis of constitutional petitions and should be resolved by using the usual process of civil litigation.
The petitioners have cleverly woven their case so as to include the respondents so as to be able to lay claims of constitutional violations while having full knowledge that the existing dispute between them and the interested parties
This petition has no merit and it fails, and it is hereby dismissed.
The petitioners shall therefore bear the costs of this petition.
Issues in the judgment
#The 2nd petitioner's supporting affidavit is inconsistently dated within the judgment
Supporting affidavit described as dated 14/6/2017 but also as doubling as affidavit for an application dated 14/7/2017
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Michael Bett Siror & another v National Land Commission & another; Stephen Sugut & 12 others (Interested Parties) [2021] KEELC 3674 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Petition (Kitale ELC), amended petition dated 3/9/2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/3674/eng@2021-04-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.