Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedELC Appeal No. 5 of 2019· [2021] KEELC 3832 (KLR)

George Osingo Ojode v Pamela Akinyi Ojode & another [2021] KEELC 3832 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
23 March 2021
3,488 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~14 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court dismissed a landowner's appeal because he participated fully in his trial but simply never filed a defence.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a first appeal to the Environment and Land Court at Migori against the judgment and decree of Hon. B. R. Kipyegon, RM in Ndhiwa Principal Magistrate's Civil Case No. 18 of 2018, delivered on 22nd January 2015, in favour of the respondents over Land Parcel No. 3128 Kamdar Adjudication Section. The respondents, as plaintiffs, had sought a permanent prohibitory injunction and declarations concerning entitlement to cultivate and occupy the land pending adjudication registration. The appellant, who was the defendant, raised four grounds contending that the suit was improperly filed, the proceedings were defective, and he was condemned without a fair hearing because an alleged defence filed in November was not considered. The appeal was canvassed by written submissions. The court framed two issues: the competence of the suit before the trial court, and whether the appellant was accorded a fair hearing. On competence, it held that the adjudication process had been finalized by the Land Adjudication Officer's decision in Objection No. 1162 of 2005, no section 29(1) appeal was lodged, and section 30(1) of the Land Adjudication Act did not bar the suit; the magistrate was duly gazetted under the ELC Act. On fair hearing, the court found the appellant entered appearance, was served, cross-examined witnesses, was granted extended time to file a defence but never did, and no defence appears on the record. Distinguishing Sebel District Administration v Gasyali, the court held the appeal devoid of merit, upheld the trial court's judgment unreservedly, and dismissed the appeal with costs to the respondents.

Key legal issues

#
01

Competence of the suit before the trial court vis-à-vis section 30 of the Land Adjudication Act

Holding

The suit was competently filed. The adjudication process over the suit land had been concluded by the Land Adjudication Officer's decision on Objection No. 1162 of 2005, no appeal or complaint was pending before the Director of Land Adjudication, and the trial Magistrate was duly gazetted to hear land disputes.

Reasoning

The court found that section 30(1) of the Land Adjudication Act stays only suits concerning interests in land where adjudication has not been finalized. Here the objection proceedings determined the rights, no appeal under section 29(1) was filed, and the magistrate was gazetted under section 26(3) and (4) of the ELC Act. The reliefs sought declarations consistent with section 13(7)(h) of the ELC Act, so the trial court had jurisdiction.

p. 4
02

Whether the appellant was denied a fair hearing

Holding

The appellant was accorded a fair hearing. He entered appearance, was served, cross-examined the plaintiffs, was granted an extension to file a defence but never did, and no defence was on the record or in the appeal record.

Reasoning

The court traced the constitutional guarantee of fair hearing under Articles 50(1) and 25(c) and the audi alteram partem rule, then examined the record: the appellant filed a memorandum of appearance, was present in court, and was given further time to file a defence outside the 14-day period under Order 7 Rule 1, yet did not comply. Since the proceedings were civil, his opportunity to be heard lay through filing a defence. He also did not come to court with clean hands, equity aiding only the vigilant.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • A first appellate court must scrutinize the evidence and findings of the trial court afresh and make its own independent findings, bearing in mind it did not see or hear the witnesses firsthand.
  • Under section 30(1) of the Land Adjudication Act, stay of suits applies to suits springing from adjudication proceedings only where the interest in land in the adjudication section has not been finalized by the Land Adjudication further to the Minister's determination under section 29(2) and (3).
  • The right to fair trial is a double-edged sword: all parties must be given an equal platform to present their cases, and a party who entered appearance, was served and participated in the trial but failed to file a defence cannot claim breach of natural justice.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondents.
  2. 2.The judgment and decree of the trial court dated 22nd January 2015 is upheld unreservedly.

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 10(2)(b), 25(c), 48, 50(1), 50(2)(c), 159(2)(d)
  • Land Adjudication ActCap 284, sections 29(1), 29(2) and (3), 30(1)
  • Land ActNo. 6 of 2012, section 2
  • Environment and Land Court Actsections 13(2)(d), 13(7)(h), 26(3) and (4)
  • Magistrates' Courts Actsection 9
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 2 rule 11(3), Order 7 Rule 1

Cases cited (9)

  • Sangram Singh vs Election Tribunal, Koteh
    ALR 1955 SC 644
  • Mungai vs Gachuhi & Anor
    (2005)
  • Signature Tours & Travel Limited vs National Bank of Kenya Ltd
  • Sebel District Administration vs Gasyali & Others
    (1968) E.A 300
  • Selle & Another v Associated Motor Boat Co. Ltd. & Others
    (1968) EA 123
  • Peters v Sunday Post Limited
    [1958] EA 424
  • Martha Kigen vs Johana Tibino Eid
    ELC Land Case 470 of 2013
  • William Mutuura Kairiba vs Samuel Nkari & 2 Others
    (2018) eKLR
  • Kanwal Sarjit Singh Dhiman vs Kasharji Jirvaji Shah
    (2015) eKLR
On appeal from
Principal Magistrate's Court at Ndhiwa
Civil Case No. 18 of 2018
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 13(2)(d), 13(7)(h) and 26(3) and (4) of the Environment and Land Court Act, read with Gazette Notice No. 11930 dated 5th December 2017 and section 9 of the Magistrates' Courts Act, 2015

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "George Osingo Ojode v Pamela Akinyi Ojode & another [2021] KEELC 3832 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). ELC Appeal No. 5 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/3832/eng@2021-03-23

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