Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedJudicial Review Application (Notice of Motion dated 2nd August, 2023) - number not stated in judgment· [2024] KEELC 3613 (KLR)

Republic v County Land Registrar; Njoka (Exparte Applicant); Njoka (Suing as the Legal Representative of Alice Kahaki Njoka - Deceased) (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Case Judicial Review Application 1 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 3613 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
2 May 2024
3,842 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~15 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Kericho, delivered virtually on 2nd May 2024 by L. A. Omollo J, determines the Interested Party/Applicant's Notice of Motion dated 2nd August 2023 seeking leave, under Order 53 Rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, to participate in judicial review proceedings. The underlying suit is an application by Elizabeth Wanjiku Njoka for an order of mandamus compelling the National Land Commission to implement its decision of 28th January 2019 in respect of land parcel Dundori/Lanet Block 5/216 (Kiamunyeki 'A'). The Applicant sought joinder as legal representative of the estate of her late mother, Alice Kahaki Njoka, asserting the suit property forms part of that estate and is also the subject of pending proceedings in Nakuru HCC Misc. Suit No. 33 of 2016. The ex parte Applicant opposed, arguing estoppel, lack of demonstrated interest and prejudice, but in submissions conceded to the joinder and sought a stay of these proceedings pending the Nakuru suit. The court framed two issues: whether the Applicant should be allowed to participate, and costs. Relying on Order 1 Rule 10(2) and the tests in Communications Commission of Kenya v Royal Media Services and Francis K. Muruatetu, the court found the Applicant had demonstrated a proximate stake, prejudice on non-joinder, and her intended case. The application was allowed: leave to participate as interested party was granted, the ex parte Applicant was directed to serve all pleadings and documents, and costs were ordered to be in the cause. The court did not rule on the stay request.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Interested Party/Applicant should be allowed to participate in the judicial review proceedings

Holding

The application for joinder was allowed; the applicant demonstrated a stake in the suit as legal representative of the estate claiming the suit property, demonstrated prejudice, and set out the case she intends to make.

Reasoning

Applying Order 1 Rule 10(2) and the Muruatetu and Communications Commission tests, the court found the applicant is the legal representative of the estate of Alice Kahaki Njoka with a grant produced, that the suit property is claimed to form part of that estate, that she would suffer prejudice if excluded since the mandamus sought relates to that property, and that she had set out her intended submissions. The court was also bound by its own earlier ruling of 27th July 2023 directing her to file a joinder application.

p. 9
02

Costs of the application

Holding

Costs were ordered to be in the cause.

Reasoning

The court disposed of the second issue by ordering costs in the cause rather than awarding them to any party, consistent with the interim, procedural nature of the joinder application.

p. 9

Legal principles established

#
  • An interested party is one who has a stake in the proceedings though not a party ab initio and will be affected by the decision either way.
  • Requirements for joinder as an interested party: identifiable proximate personal interest, demonstrated prejudice on non-joinder, and the case/submissions the party intends to make.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Applicant is hereby granted leave to participate in these proceeding as an Interested Party.
  2. 2.The ex parte Applicant shall serve upon the interested Party all pleadings and documents.
  3. 3.The costs of this application shall be in the cause.

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 53 Rule 3(2)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 1 Rule 10(2)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 50
  • Civil ActSection 6 (referred to by the ex parte Applicant/Respondent)

Cases cited (9)

  • Mwangi Stephen Muriithi v National Land Commission & 3 others
    [2018] eKLR
  • James N. Wa Wambu vs Republic & 7 others
    [1995] eKLR
  • Kenya African National Union vs Mwai Kibaki & 6 Others
    [2005] eKLR (Nairobi High Court Miscellaneous Number 128 of 2003)
  • Trusted Society of Human Rights Alliance v Mumo Matemu & 5 others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Meme vs Republic
    [2004] 1 EA 124
  • S.N.K v M.S.N.K Civil Appeal No. 277 of 2005
  • Republic v Communication Authority of Kenya and another ex parte Legal Advice Center aka Kituo Cha Sheria
    [2015] eKLR
  • Communications Commission of Kenya and 4 Others v Royal Media Services Limited & 7 Others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Francis K. Muruatetu and another v. Republic & 5 others
    (2016) eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 53 Rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Republic v County Land Registrar; Njoka (Exparte Applicant); Njoka (Suing as the Legal Representative of Alice Kahaki Njoka - Deceased) (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Case Judicial Review Application 1 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 3613 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Judicial Review Application (Notice of Motion dated 2nd August, 2023) - number not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/3613/eng@2024-05-02

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