Exparte Applicant v Principal Adjudication Officer & 3 others (Judicial Review)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court threw out a land dispute case because the applicant missed a 21-day filing deadline after getting permission to sue.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Timely filing of the substantive notice of motion after leave in judicial review
The applicant did not file the notice of motion within the 21 days from 26.7.2023 (i.e. by 16.8.2023); no filed copy could be traced in the court record or e-filing systems
The court could not trace any notice of motion dated 15.8.2023 or filed on 16.8.2023 in its records or the e-filing and e-payment systems, and the applicant did not supply a filed copy. The burden lay on the applicant to prove compliance with the timeline or the court's orders, and no stamped and paid motion or receipt was on the file.
Consequence of non-compliance with the filing timeline
The leave becomes spent and all subsequent proceedings, including the respondents' and interested parties' responses and submissions, are a nullity
Non-compliance with the statutory timeline for filing the substantive motion means the leave lapses. Without extension of time and fresh leave, anything filed thereafter, including the responses and submissions, is of no legal effect, and the court found it unnecessary to consider them.
Burden of proving compliance
The onus was on the exparte applicant to establish compliance with the court's orders on time or at all
Applying the principle that he who alleges must prove, the court held that the applicant had to demonstrate through the court file, duly stamped and paid documents and receipts that the motion was filed in time. Absence of these from the file was fatal to the proceedings.
Legal principles established
#- Once leave to apply for judicial review is granted, the substantive notice of motion must be filed within 21 days or such other period as the court fixes; non-compliance renders the leave spent and subsequent proceedings a nullity
- Compliance with filing timelines must be proved on the court record by duly stamped and paid documents, not by guesswork
Court orders
#- 1.The judicial review proceedings are declared a nullity
- 2.The proceedings are dismissed with costs to the respondents and the interested parties
- 3.File closed
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction under the Fair Administrative Action Act/Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules (leave granted on 26.7.2023 to commence judicial review proceedings)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Exparte Applicant v Principal Adjudication Officer & 3 others (Judicial Review)", Case Analysis (2024). Judicial Review proceedings re Objections No's 3084, 3086 and 3094 over Land Parcels Nos. 1136, 7770, 11478 and 3866 Karama Adjudication Section. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/598/eng@2024-02-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.