Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedJudicial Review (Notice of motion dated 24th August 2023)· [2024] KEELC 6422 (KLR)

Boit v Deputy County Commissioner Baringo Central Sub County & 3 others; Relimoi (Interested Party) (Judicial Review Cause E001 of 2024) [2024] KEELC 6422 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya (Judicial Review jurisdiction)
26 September 2024
1,851 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The High Court in Iten dismissed a landowner's attempt to overturn a ministerial land appeal decision, ruling he failed to prove his claims of lateness, unfairness, or bias.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By a notice of motion dated 24th August 2023, Peter Keter Boit, an ex parte applicant who had obtained leave on 14th March 2023, sought an order of certiorari to quash the proceedings and judgment of the Deputy County Commissioner, Baringo Central (1st respondent) in Appeal to the Minister Case No. 453 of 2022 delivered on 28th February 2023 concerning land parcel No. 278 Morop Adjudication Section, and an order of prohibition restraining the 3rd and 4th respondents from issuing a title deed to the interested party pursuant to that decision. The applicant contended that the appeal to the Minister was time barred, that he was denied a fair hearing as a person with disability because no sign language interpreter was provided, and that the 1st respondent was biased. The respondents, through the affidavit of John Ongalo Laku, maintained that the appeal was filed within time as shown in a register of appeals, that an interpreter was provided, that the applicant was represented by his brother under a family appointment and Power of Attorney, and that both parties were heard and cross-examined. Framing three issues (time-bar, fair hearing and bias), the court held that the applicant bore the burden under section 107 of the Evidence Act of proving the time-bar but adduced no evidence, while the register of appeals showed timely filing; and that the proceedings demonstrated a fair hearing without bias. The motion was dismissed with costs to the respondents.

Key legal issues

#
01

Time-bar of the appeal to the Minister

Holding

The appeal was filed within time; the register of appeals showed it was filed within the statutory period

Reasoning

The applicant asserted that the appeal to the Minister was filed outside the statutory period but adduced no evidence. Under section 107 of the Evidence Act the burden lay on him. The 1st respondent filed a register of appeals showing the appeal was lodged before the time for filing lapsed, defeating the time-bar ground.

p. 5
02

Fair hearing

Holding

The applicant was accorded a fair hearing; the proceedings show both parties presented their cases and cross-examined witnesses, and his brother represented him pursuant to a family appointment and Power of Attorney

Reasoning

The proceedings (JOL 2) showed both parties had opportunity to present their cases and cross-examine witnesses. A hearing interpreter was present, and the applicant's representation by his brother Michael Kipketer Boit was by family appointment documented in the affidavit JOL5, not imposed by the 1st respondent. The applicant's evidence was considered in the decision.

p. 5
03

Bias

Holding

No bias by the 1st respondent was proved

Reasoning

Allegations of interjections, leading questions and a predetermined outcome were not supported. The questions asked of the interested party were similar to those asked of the applicant's witness; the decision gave reasons and considered all parties' evidence; failure to conduct a site visit is discretionary and does not denote bias.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • The party asserting that an appeal was filed out of time bears the burden of proving that fact

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated 24th August 2023 is dismissed with costs to the respondents
Jurisdiction invoked
Leave granted on 14th March 2023 to apply for judicial review orders of Certiorari and Prohibition

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Boit v Deputy County Commissioner Baringo Central Sub County & 3 others; Relimoi (Interested Party) (Judicial Review Cause E001 of 2024) [2024] KEELC 6422 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Judicial Review (Notice of motion dated 24th August 2023). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/6422/eng@2024-09-26

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