Nzaka & 2 others v District Land Registrar Kilifi & another; Katumbi (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 992 (KLR)

Applying Mukisa Biscuits, the objection raised a pure point of law on jurisdiction. Regulation 40(6) provides that an aggrieved party may appeal the Registrar's boundary decision to the Court within thirty days. Following Speaker of the National Assembly v Karume and prior ELC decisions, the prescribed appellate route must be strictly followed; judicial review does not lie where an appeal is provided and was not taken, and the applicants did not establish any exception to the exhaustion doctrine under section 9 of the Fair Administrative Action Act.

The court found from the surveyor's report and the Registrar's findings that the applicants' representatives attended the boundary exercise and that the applicants originated the proceedings. Their complaints that the report came a year later and that their side was not considered relate to the merits of the decision and thus fall within an appeal, not the judicial review process-focused remedy.

Section 9(2) bars review unless internal and statutory remedies are first exhausted, and section 9(4) permits exemption only in exceptional circumstances in the interest of justice. Relying on Mwanzia v Rhodes, the court noted that suitable appellate mechanisms must be used and ouster provisions construed restrictively. The applicants did not invoke or establish any exceptional circumstances exempting them from the appeal route under Regulation 40(6).