Republic v County Commissioner, Elgeyo Marakwet & 3 others; Suter & 11 others (Interested Parties); Chemastan & another (Exparte Applicants)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court dismissed a challenge to a land adjudication appeal decision, confirming that claims of unfair hearings must be backed by evidence.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the ex parte applicants were denied a fair hearing before the Minister's delegate
The court held the applicants were heard; the proceedings showed the appellant was heard in person and through a witness, and no evidence proved the alleged denial
The court examined the proceedings of the appeal heard by the DCC Marakwet East with assessors. Contrary to the applicants' contention, the record showed the appellant was heard personally and through a witness. As the party alleging denial of the right to be heard, the applicants bore the burden of proof but produced no evidence capable of proving the allegation.
Whether the court could interfere with the decision of the adjudication organs and the Minister
Interference is only permissible on the grounds contemplated in Municipal Council of Mombasa v Republic - process errors, not merits - and none was proved
The court adopted the Court of Appeal's statement in Municipal Council of Mombasa that judicial review examines the decision-making process: whether the decision-maker had jurisdiction, whether affected persons were heard, and whether relevant or irrelevant matters were considered. The applicants pleaded such grounds but failed to adduce evidence proving their existence.
Whether the second adjudication of the suit parcels was unlawful
The respondents explained the first adjudication was never completed because the office was invaded and records destroyed, necessitating a fresh process; the applicants' contention failed
The respondents acknowledged a previous adjudication but deponed that before completion the adjudication office was invaded and all documents destroyed, so the process had to be restarted afresh. The interested parties likewise stated the previous process was never finalized and records could not be traced. The applicants' assertion of a completed prior adjudication was not established.
Legal principles established
#- Judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not the merits of the decision; a review court is not entitled to act as a court of appeal over the decision-maker
- A party alleging denial of a fair hearing bears the burden of producing evidence proving that allegation
Court orders
#- 1.Dismissal of the Notice of Motion dated 14th September 2021
- 2.Costs of the application to the respondents and the interested parties
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction over certiorari and prohibition under Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Act, in respect of decisions under the Land Adjudication Act, Cap 284
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v County Commissioner, Elgeyo Marakwet & 3 others; Suter & 11 others (Interested Parties); Chemastan & another (Exparte Applicants)", Case Analysis (2022). Judicial Review 18 of 2022 (Formerly Eldoret Judicial Review No. 10 of 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/15289/eng@2022-12-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.