Kigathi v Kenya National Highways Authority & another; National Land Commission (Interested Party) (Environment & Land Petition E062 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 993 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Landowners disputing compulsory acquisition compensation in Kenya must first go to the Land Acquisition Tribunal before filing a court case, or risk having it struck out.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Preliminary Objection is a pure point of law
The Preliminary Objection meets the test - it raises pure points of law determinable without ascertaining facts
Applying the Mukhisa Biscuit test as restated by the Supreme Court in Hassan Ali Joho, the court distilled that a proper preliminary objection must be a pure point of law argued on the assumption that the facts pleaded by the other side are correct, and cannot be raised where facts are disputed or discretion is sought. The jurisdictional/exhaustion objection here satisfied that test since it required no ascertainment of facts.
Whether this Court has jurisdiction over the Petition given Section 133C of the Land Act
The Petitioner prematurely invoked the court's jurisdiction; the Land Acquisition Tribunal enjoys jurisdictional primacy over compulsory acquisition disputes, including delayed payment and constitutional property-rights complaints
Section 133C(6) requires all matters relating to compulsory acquisition to go first to the Tribunal, and Section 133C(8) empowers the Tribunal to hear constitutional complaints under Articles 23(2) and 47(3). The Petitioner's grievance - non-payment and depreciation of a 2021 award - falls within the Tribunal's wide jurisdiction. This court's jurisdiction is appellate and restricted to questions of law under Section 133D. The exhaustion doctrine, as explained by the Supreme Court, required resort to the Tribunal first.
Legal principles established
#- A matter relating to compulsory acquisition of land must, in the first instance, be referred to the Land Acquisition Tribunal, including complaints arising under Articles 23(2) and 47(3) of the Constitution
- Where Parliament has provided a forum to adjudicate a matter, that forum ought to be given the opportunity to carry out its duty (exhaustion doctrine)
- A court cannot adjudicate on matters in which it lacks jurisdiction and cannot arrogate to itself jurisdiction not conferred by law
Court orders
#- 1.The Preliminary Objection dated 17/9/24 is upheld; it succeeds
- 2.The Petition dated 24/7/24 together with the Notice of Motion dated 30/9/24 are struck out
- 3.Each party to meet their costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution; Sections 13 and 133C of the Land Act, 2012
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (3)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Maiko Oloiputa Miaroi, Julius Ole Mokita & Lenkai Ole Metetai (Suing in the capacity of the Registered Representatives of over 600 families that are members of the Oloirien Group Ranch) v Director, Land Adjudication & Settlement & 12 Others[2026] KEELC 5925 (KLR)30 Sept 2026
- Simandi Investments Limited & another v Macharia & 6 others (Environment and Land Petition E035 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 890 (KLR)[2026] KEELC 890 (KLR)19 Feb 2026
- Maingi v National Land Commission & another (Land Case E050 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 6463 (KLR)[2025] KEELC 6463 (KLR)30 Sept 2025followed
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kigathi v Kenya National Highways Authority & another; National Land Commission (Interested Party) (Environment & Land Petition E062 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 993 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Petition dated 24/7/24 (with Notice of Motion dated 30/9/24). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/993/eng@2025-02-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.