Kasimba v National Irrigation Authority & 3 others (Environment and Land Petition E005 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 1440 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Migori landowner's compensation claim over irrigation wayleaves was struck out because Kenya's Land Acquisition Tribunal must hear such disputes first, not the courts.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over claims for compensation arising from creation of wayleaves and compulsory acquisition
The petition was struck out because the core issue - compensation for compulsory acquisition and creation of wayleaves - must first be presented to the Land Acquisition Tribunal established under Section 133A of the Land Act
Section 133C(6) of the Land Act, introduced by the Land (Value) Amendment Act, 2019, mandates that matters relating to compulsory acquisition of land or creation of wayleaves, easements and public rights of way be referred in the first instance to the Land Acquisition Tribunal. The petitioner's claim was fundamentally about compensation for displacement without compensation, invoking Sections 143-149 of the Land Act. Where an alternative mechanism exists, the court ought to avoid jurisdiction and allow that mechanism to be exhausted first. The petitioner offered no reason why he could not access the Tribunal.
Exhaustion of alternative remedies doctrine
The doctrine of exhaustion applies, and the petitioner ought first to present his grievance before the Land Acquisition Tribunal
Relying on the Court of Appeal's decision in Geoffrey Muthinja & Another v Samuel Muguma Henry & 1756 others (2015) eKLR, the court held that where a dispute resolution mechanism exists outside courts, it must be exhausted before invoking the court's jurisdiction, since courts are fora of last resort. This accords with Article 159 of the Constitution. The petitioner, despite being given the opportunity, advanced no submissions opposing the jurisdictional objection, leaving the 1st respondent's submissions uncontroverted.
Legal principles established
#- Where an alternative dispute resolution mechanism exists outside the courts, it must be exhausted before the jurisdiction of the courts is invoked; courts are fora of last resort
- Matters relating to compulsory acquisition of land or creation of wayleaves, easements and public rights of way must, in the first instance, be referred to the Land Acquisition Tribunal under Section 133C(6) of the Land Act
Court orders
#- 1.The petition is struck out
- 2.Each party to bear his/her own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Constitution of Kenya, 2010 (petition alleging violation of Articles 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 40, 42, 43 and 47); jurisdiction contested under Section 133C(6) of the Land Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kasimba v National Irrigation Authority & 3 others (Environment and Land Petition E005 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 1440 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/1440/eng@2025-03-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.