Republic v Registrar of Titles, Nairobi & another; Meron Limited (Exparte Applicant) (Judicial Review Application E001 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 475 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Registrar of Titles cannot revoke land titles—only a court can—so Meron Limited's six titles were restored after the illegal revocation was quashed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Chief Land Registrar acted ultra vires by cancelling and revoking the titles
Yes - the Registrar acted in excess of jurisdiction. Section 79(2) requires a 90-day written notice and the Registrar lacked power to revoke titles; only the court under Section 80(1) can direct cancellation.
The court held judicial review scrutinises process not merits. The Registrar claimed to act under Section 79(2) of the Land Registration Act, but that provision carries a proviso mandating ninety days' written notice before alteration; the Registrar gave only seven days' notice, so was not exercising Section 79(2) powers. Following binding Court of Appeal precedent in Super Nova Properties, the Registrar of Titles has no power to revoke a title; cancellation requires strict proof of fraud and only a court under Section 80(1) may order it. The revocation was therefore without jurisdiction and amenable to Certiorari.
Whether the reliefs of Certiorari and Mandamus are available to the ex parte Applicant
Certiorari was available and issued; Mandamus was refused as unnecessary.
Relying on Republic v KNEC ex parte Gathenji, the court held Certiorari issues where a decision is made without jurisdiction or in breach of natural justice. Having found the Registrar's decision without jurisdiction, Certiorari quashing the gazette revocations issued. Quashing the decision effectively restores the register to its prior state, so Mandamus to compel restoration was unnecessary.
Legal principles established
#- The Registrar of Titles has no power to revoke or cancel a title on the basis of fraud or illegality; only a court of law can direct cancellation of a registration under Section 80(1) of the Land Registration Act.
- Judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not the merits of the decision.
Court orders
#- 1.An order of Certiorari removing into the court and quashing the decision by the Registrar of Titles Nairobi to revoke and cancel the leases and certificates of titles in respect of parcels of land Nairobi/Block 219/48, Nairobi/Block 219/49, Nairobi/Block 219/50, Nairobi/Block 219/51, Nairobi/Block 219/52 and Nairobi/Block 219/53.
- 2.Costs of the proceedings awarded to the ex parte Applicant against the 1st Respondent only.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 47 of the Constitution and the Fair Administrative Action Act / Land Registration Act (not expressly stated in the judgment)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Registrar of Titles, Nairobi & another; Meron Limited (Exparte Applicant) (Judicial Review Application E001 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 475 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (Judicial Review Notice of Motion dated 16th February 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/475/eng@2025-02-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.