Republic v Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer & another; M'Mutea (Exparte); M'Imagana & 2 others (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case 03 of 2020) [2022] KEELC 3441 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A landowner who skipped the required appeal to the Minister lost his court challenge, so always finish internal land dispute steps first.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Applicable statute governing the Ruiri/Rwarera adjudication objections
The Land Adjudication Act, not the Land Consolidation Act, governed the proceedings
It was not in dispute that the consent issued under the Land Adjudication Act and that the parcels fell within the Ruiri/Rwarera Adjudication Section established under that Act. The objections were therefore determined under sections 26 and 29 thereof, and the applicant's reliance on the Land Consolidation Act was misconceived.
Exhaustion of internal remedies
The application failed on the non-exhaustion doctrine; the applicant never appealed to the Minister under section 29 nor applied under section 9(4) FAAA
The court applied the exhaustion doctrine (Geoffrey Muthinja Kabiru; Mutanga Tea) and section 9(3) FAAA. Exceptional circumstances must be formally demonstrated; the applicant did not explain non-compliance with section 26(1) or invoke section 9(4).
Whether the decision was ultra vires for lack of land committee participation
No - the Land Adjudication Act does not require committee members at objection hearings
Having found the Land Adjudication Act applied, the court held it imposes no requirement of committee participation, distinguishing the Land Consolidation Act (Peter Kimandiu case). The ultra vires complaint therefore collapsed.
Whether the applicant was denied fair hearing (interpreter, cross-examination, absence of 2nd interested party)
Not proved; the record showed full participation and no protest was recorded
He who avers must prove on a balance of probability. The proceedings indicated full participation including cross-examination; no supplementary affidavit was filed to deny the respondents' assertions of fair hearing. No evidence showed irrelevant considerations or failure to consider relevant ones.
Legal principles established
#- A party must exhaust internal dispute resolution mechanisms before invoking judicial review, and must formally demonstrate exceptional circumstances under section 9(4) of the Fair Administrative Action Act
- The Land Adjudication Act does not require the presence of land adjudication committee members in hearing and determining objections, unlike the Land Consolidation Act
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion dated December 9, 2021 is dismissed
- 2.The exparte applicant to pay costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction over land adjudication officer's decision; Land Adjudication Act and Fair Administrative Action Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer & another; M'Mutea (Exparte); M'Imagana & 2 others (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case 03 of 2020) [2022] KEELC 3441 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Judicial Review Notice of Motion dated December 9, 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/3441/eng@2022-07-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.