Riungu v Chief Land Registrar & 4 others (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case E010 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 3244 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The court dismissed a landowner's attempt to use judicial review to prove land ownership, ruling the matter was already decided and must be litigated through an ordinary suit.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Res judicata
The suit is res judicata; the order of mandamus now sought was the same relief declined in Meru High Court Judicial Review No. 95 of 2010 (Cherono J, 8 February 2018), and the applicant's remedy was appeal or review
The court found that there was prior litigation over the same plot between the applicant and the same public bodies, in which certiorari and prohibition were granted but mandamus compelling issuance of a certificate of lease was declined. Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act and Section 28 of the Environment and Land Court Act bar a fresh suit; the proper course was review under Section 80 CPA and Order 45 Rule 1 or an appeal.
Whether the court, sitting as a judicial review court, can declare the applicant owner of the suit land
No - the ownership issue is highly contested and requires merit review on oral evidence in an ordinary suit, outside the judicial review remit
The applicant claims to be bona fide absolute proprietor while the 4th respondent contends the parcel is public land irregularly allocated. Determining ownership would entail a merit review. Judicial review rests on affidavit evidence, unsuited to resolving contested documentary claims of ownership; such disputes belong to an ordinary suit.
Legal principles established
#- A suit whose reliefs were determined, or ought to have been raised, in a former suit between the same parties is barred by res judicata; the remedy is appeal or review, not a fresh suit
- Contested ownership of land cannot be determined in judicial review proceedings on affidavit evidence; it must be litigated by ordinary suit with oral evidence
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 14th June, 2023 (filed 19th June 2023) is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 8 and 9 of the Law Reform Act and Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules (judicial review jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Riungu v Chief Land Registrar & 4 others (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case E010 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 3244 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). ELC Judicial Review E010 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/3244/eng@2024-02-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.