Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedMiscellaneous Application 52 of 2022· [2023] KEELC 20649 (KLR)

Nguwa & 8 others v Kanyolo & another

Environment and Land Court
13 October 2023
1,949 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Land Court gave a family extra time to appeal an NLC land decision because the Commission never told them about it.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicants, administrators of the estate of the late Kirao Kombe Hare, sought leave to file an appeal out of time against a National Land Commission decision of February 15, 2019 regularizing plot No Kili/Jimba/325 in favour of the 1st respondent, together with an order compelling the NLC to avail certified records of the review proceedings and a stay of execution of the directive. They deponed that the deceased's ownership had been confirmed in 2009 and again by the NLC in 2013 and at an October 2018 Watamu dispute hearing, but that they only learnt of the adverse gazette decision on January 28, 2020 when they visited the Kilifi registry, explaining their failure to appeal within the statutory 14 days under regulation 30 of the NLC (Review of Grants and Dispositions of Public Land) Regulations, 2017. The 2nd respondent filed a preliminary objection contending the appeal was out of time under rule 30(1) and section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act and not in the form of a memorandum of appeal under order 42 rule 1. The court dismissed the preliminary objection, holding that the application was for leave, not an appeal. Applying section 95 of the Civil Procedure Act, order 50 rule 6 and the Thuita Mwangi factors, the court found the NLC had adduced no evidence of communicating its decision to the applicants, so the delay was sufficiently explained. The application was allowed, with the applicants to file their appeal within 28 days failing which the order lapses, and each party bearing their own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a preliminary objection on limitation and form of appeal lies against an application for leave to file appeal out of time

Holding

No; the application is not an appeal, so objections premised on appeal requirements are misconceived

Reasoning

The court noted the 2nd respondent's preliminary objection assumed the application was itself an appeal. Since the application merely sought leave to file an appeal out of time, the objections based on rule 30(1) of the NLC Regulations, section 79G and order 42 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules had no foundation and were dismissed.

p. 3
02

Whether the delay of over two years in seeking leave to appeal out of time was excusable

Holding

Yes; the applicants only learnt of the NLC decision on January 28, 2020 and the NLC did not prove it communicated the decision

Reasoning

The applicants deponed they attended the Watamu hearing, were told the property would be registered in favour of the deceased, and only discovered the February 15, 2019 gazette decision on January 28, 2020. Those facts were undisputed, and the NLC tendered no evidence of communication of the decision within the regulatory period, so the delay was sufficiently explained.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • Where the Commission did not communicate its decision to the aggrieved parties as required by the regulations, the delay in filing an appeal out of time is sufficiently explained

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The 2nd respondent's preliminary objection is dismissed
  2. 2.The application is allowed; applicants to file an appeal within 28 days failing which the order lapses
  3. 3.Each party to bear their own costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 95 of the Civil Procedure Act and order 50 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules; NLC (Review of Grants and Dispositions of Public Land) Regulations, 2017

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Nguwa & 8 others v Kanyolo & another", Case Analysis (2023). Miscellaneous Application 52 of 2022. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/20649/eng@2023-10-13

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