Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck OutEnvironment & Land Case 141 of 1992· [2023] KEELC 16183 (KLR)

Kaugu & 246 others v Attorney General & 3 others; Mbiuki (Suing on behalf of 210 members of Ntarangwi Settlement Scheme Self Help Group) (Interested Party)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
8 March 2023
2,484 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~10 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A 31-year-old land dispute was struck out because the land had been declared an adjudication section, and no one had obtained the required consent to sue.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling by the Environment and Land Court at Meru (C.K. Nzili, J) determined a notice of motion dated 4 October 2022 by the Attorney General in a representative suit filed in 1992 by 247 members of the Ntarangwi (Ntoringwi) Settlement Scheme claiming ownership, compensation for plots taken by the Department of Defence, subdivision and issuance of title deeds, and a restraining order against further allocations. The applicant sought substituted service, a stay of proceedings pending completion of the Ngaremara/Gambella Rikiau Adjudication Section process, leave to amend pleadings, and consolidation with eight other Meru matters concerning the same adjudication section. The defendants supported the motion; the interested party opposed orally without filing a replying affidavit. The court declined consolidation because parties in the listed files were never served despite a prior order for substituted service. On the stay, the court held that the land was declared an adjudication section on 11.3.2016, that under section 30 of the Land Adjudication Act no suit over such land may proceed without the adjudication officer's consent, and that want of consent renders proceedings a nullity. Relying on Bhaijee v Nandi, Tobias Achola Osidi and Owners of the Motor Vessel 'Lillian S', the court found it lacked jurisdiction, held the suit a nullity from 11.3.2016, and struck it out with no order as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the court has jurisdiction over land under an active adjudication section

Holding

The court lacks jurisdiction to sustain or entertain a suit over land undergoing adjudication; the suit became a nullity upon declaration of the adjudication section

Reasoning

Section 30 of the Land Adjudication Act bars suits over land in an adjudication section without the adjudication officer's consent. The Ntarangwi area was declared an adjudication section on 11.3.2016. Neither plaintiffs nor interested party obtained consent or opposed that fact. Ascertainment of interests in such land is for the land adjudication officer, not the court. The suit therefore became a nullity and cannot be stayed, only struck out.

02

Whether the suit should be consolidated with the eight listed matters

Holding

Consolidation refused because parties in the listed files were never served despite a court order for substituted service

Reasoning

Consolidation must not confer undue advantage on the applicant or disadvantage opponents. On 3.11.2022 the court granted leave for substituted service on the public and all affected parties, but no evidence of service on parties in the named files was filed. Without prior notice to those parties and the public, consolidation and extension of orders could not be granted.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Court proceedings over land falling under a declared adjudication section, brought without consent under section 30(4) of the Land Adjudication Act, are a nullity
  • A question of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the proceedings

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The suit is struck out with no order as to costs
  2. 2.Consolidation of the named suits with this file is declined
  3. 3.Extension of any orders issued herein to the matters listed in prayer (d) of the application is declined

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159 2 (a), (b), (c) and (d)
  • Civil Procedure Actsections 1A and 1B
  • Environment and Land Court Actsection 3
  • Land Adjudication Act (Cap 284)sections 24, 25 and 30

Cases cited (9)

  • Global Tours & Travels Ltd, Nairobi HC Winding Up Case No 43 of 2000

    Factors for stay: expeditious disposal, prima facie merits, judicial time, expedition of application

  • Kenya Wildlife Service vs James Mutembei
    [2019] eKLR

    Stay of judicial action interferes with access to justice; test for stay should be high and stringent

  • LSK v Centre for Rights and Democracy
    [2013] eKLR

    Consolidation must not confer undue advantage or occasion disadvantage

  • Bhaijee and another vs Nandi & another
    (Civil Appeal 139 of 2019) (2022) KECA 119 (KLR)

    Rationale of section 30; lack of consent renders proceedings over adjudication section land a nullity

  • Tobias Achola Osidi & 13 others v Cyprianus Otieno Ogalo & 6 others
    [2013] eKLR

    Court has no jurisdiction to determine ownership of land under adjudication; that is for the adjudication officer

  • Owners of the Motor Vessel “Lillian S” v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd
    [1989] KLR 1

    Want of consent to sue must be determined in limine at whatever stage raised

  • Republic v Chief Registrar of the Judiciary & 2 others Exparte Riley Services Ltd
    [2015] eKLR

    A preliminary objection can be raised at any stage; best raised at earliest opportunity

  • Peter Kabete M’Nkanyuaga v Jacob Mutegi Mwathi
    [2017] eKLR

    No jurisdiction over unadjudicated land except on integrity of adjudication process

  • Hassan Ngoka Dzombo v Ruwa Kope & another
    [2021] eKLR

    Upholding preliminary objection on jurisdiction and striking out suit on unadjudicated land

Jurisdiction invoked
Article 159(2) of the Constitution of Kenya; sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act; section 3 of the Environment and Land Court Act; section 30 of the Land Adjudication Act (Cap 284)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kaugu & 246 others v Attorney General & 3 others; Mbiuki (Suing on behalf of 210 members of Ntarangwi Settlement Scheme Self Help Group) (Interested Party)", Case Analysis (2023). Environment & Land Case 141 of 1992. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/16183/eng@2023-03-08

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