Abdille & another v Kenya National Highways Authority & 3 others; Ndungu & 21 others (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Petition E003 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 4618 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court allowed a World Bank-funded road compensation program to proceed, ruling resettlement payments differ from compulsory land acquisition.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction of the ELC vis-à-vis the Land Acquisition Tribunal and Section 29 of the Kenya Roads Act arbitration mechanism
Objections to jurisdiction overruled; the Court was properly seized of the matter
Sections 107–133 of the Land Act deal exclusively with compulsory acquisition of land, whereas the compensation in issue was for 'replacement assets' and 'livelihood restoration' of persons on the public road reserve. As no PAP objected to the NLC's valuation schedule, there was no dispute requiring reference to the Tribunal or to an arbitrator under Section 29 of the Kenya Roads Act.
Whether KeNHA usurped the NLC's constitutional and statutory mandate
KeNHA did not usurp NLC's mandate as the payments were resettlement/displacement costs, not compulsory acquisition
The NLC itself identified the PAPs, carried out the valuations and furnished the compensation schedule to KeNHA; only disbursement remained. The works lay on an existing public road reserve, and any compulsory acquisition of private or community land would still be carried out by the NLC under the Land Act.
Whether conservatory orders should issue
Conservatory orders refused; application dismissed
Applying the Munya and Wilson Kaberia Nkunja principles, the Petitioners failed to demonstrate a prima facie case with probability of success, and public interest favoured allowing the World Bank-funded compensation to be paid before the facility deadline rather than stalling a project of great regional public benefit.
Legal principles established
#- Valuations and compensation for 'replacement assets' and 'livelihood restoration' of persons occupying a public road reserve do not constitute compulsory acquisition of land under Sections 107–133 of the Land Act, 2012, and do not oust KeNHA's role as disbursing agency
- The Land Acquisition Tribunal's jurisdiction under Section 133A is confined to disputes concerning compulsory acquisition of land; it does not extend to resettlement compensation absent an actual dispute
- Section 29 of the Kenya Roads Act, 2007 arbitration route applies only where there is a genuine dispute as to compensation; where the valuation schedule is undisputed, no reference to an arbitrator arises
Court orders
#- 1.The Petitioners' Notice of Motion dated 27th March 2025 is dismissed with no order as to costs
- 2.The interim conservatory order granted on 4th April 2025 is discharged
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 67 and 70 of the Constitution and the Land Act, 2012 (constitutional petition for conservatory orders); jurisdiction objections under Section 133A of the Land Act, 2012 and Section 29 of the Kenya Roads Act, 2007 rejected
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Abdille & another v Kenya National Highways Authority & 3 others; Ndungu & 21 others (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Petition E003 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 4618 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Petition dated 27th March 2025 (Not stated in full). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4618/eng@2025-06-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.