Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedJudicial Review Application 1 of 2017· [2023] KEELC 16146 (KLR)

Republic v Provincial Land Disputes Appeals Committee; Mutai (Exparte Applicant); Barngetuny (Interested Party)

Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
16 March 2023
JOJ.M Onyango
1,228 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed that Land Disputes Tribunals could never decide who owns registered land, quashing a committee's ruling as void.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The ex parte applicant, Samson Mutai, sought certiorari to quash the decision of the Nakuru Provincial Land Disputes Appeals Committee dated May 6, 2011 in Appeal No 50 of 2008, which had ruled against him in a land dispute with the interested party, Jepkuto Barngetuny. The underlying dispute concerned 4.7 acres of land parcel Nandi/Baraton/382, which the applicant said he had purchased from the interested party. A Kapsabet Land Disputes Tribunal award in his favour was adopted by the magistrates' court in 2009; the interested party's High Court application to quash it was struck out as out of time, and her subsequent substantive suit (Kapsabet PMCC No 100 of 2010) was dismissed as an abuse of process. She then appealed to the Provincial Committee, which decided against the applicant. The applicant moved to the High Court by Notice of Motion dated June 10, 2011. The Respondent, through the Attorney General, did not oppose the application. The court framed a single issue: whether the Committee had jurisdiction to hear an appeal over title to registered land. Relying on section 3(1) of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act and section 159 of the Registered Land Act (repealed), and following Republic v Chairman Lurambi Land Disputes Tribunal and Mateo Githua Ngurukie, the court held the Committee lacked jurisdiction over title disputes; per Macfoy v United Africa Co Ltd, its decision was a nullity. Certiorari issued quashing the Committee's decision, with costs to the interested party.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction of the Provincial Land Disputes Appeals Committee over title disputes to registered land

Holding

The Committee had no jurisdiction; its decision quashing/deciding the appeal was null and void and certiorari issued to quash it.

Reasoning

Section 3(1) of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act confined tribunals to boundary disputes, claims to occupy or work land, and trespass. Appeals to the Provincial Committee had to fall within that jurisdiction. The dispute concerned title to registered land (Nandi/Baraton/382) under the Registered Land Act, which section 159 reserved to the High Court or Resident Magistrate's Court. Established case law confirms tribunals lacked title jurisdiction; a decision without jurisdiction is a nullity per Macfoy.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Land Disputes Tribunals and the Provincial Land Disputes Appeals Committee had no jurisdiction to determine disputes over title to registered land
  • A decision made without jurisdiction is a nullity, void and incurably bad without need of an order to set it aside

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order of certiorari issued quashing the decision made by the Respondent on May 6, 2011 in Nakuru Provincial Land Dispute Appeals Committee Appeal No 50 of 2008
  2. 2.Costs of the application borne by the Interested Party

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Land Disputes Tribunal ActSection 3(1)
  • Registered Land Act Cap 300Section 159

Cases cited (3)

  • Republic v Chairman Lurambi Land Disputes Tribunal & 2 Others
    (2006) eKLR

    Tribunals' powers under section 3(1) do not include determining title to land

  • Mateo Githua Ngurukie v Hon Attorney General & 5 Others
    Nyeri HC Civil Suit No 206 of 1990

    Land Disputes Tribunal lacks jurisdiction over registered land touching title

  • Macfoy v United Africa Co Ltd
    (1961) 3 All ER 1162

    An act done without jurisdiction is void, a nullity, and incurably bad

Jurisdiction invoked
Judicial review jurisdiction of the High Court/Environment and Land Court under Order 53 (Notice of Motion for certiorari); Land Disputes Tribunal Act No 18 of 1990 (repealed)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Republic v Provincial Land Disputes Appeals Committee; Mutai (Exparte Applicant); Barngetuny (Interested Party)", Case Analysis (2023). Judicial Review Application 1 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/16146/eng@2023-03-16

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