Republic v Land Registrar, Migori County & another; Adera (Ex parte) (Judicial Review Application 1 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 7188 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court ordered Migori land officials to fix disputed boundaries within 30 days after a three-year delay, but refused compensation without proof of actual loss.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether mandamus lies to compel the Land Registrar and County Surveyor to ascertain and fix land boundaries
Yes - Section 19 of the Land Registration Act imposes a clear statutory duty, and the Applicant had applied and paid, yet the Respondents failed to act for over three years without explanation
Section 19 read with Section 18(2) of the Land Registration Act makes boundary ascertainment and fixing a mandatory administrative function exclusively within the Land Registrar's purview. The Applicant complied with procedural requirements by applying and paying on 10th February 2020. The Respondents, though duly served, filed no response explaining the inaction. Such unexplained inaction amounts to unreasonable delay and breaches Article 47 and Section 4(1) of the Fair Administrative Action Act, warranting mandamus.
Whether compensation should be awarded for the administrative delay
No - compensation under Section 11(1)(j) of the Fair Administrative Action Act is discretionary and requires evidence of quantifiable loss, which was not adduced
While the Fair Administrative Action Act empowers the Court to award pecuniary compensation, such relief must be supported by evidence of quantifiable loss or demonstrable violation of a constitutional right. The Applicant only demonstrated inconvenience occasioned by the delay and produced no specific evidence of loss or damage, so the claim for compensation was declined.
Costs of the application
Each party to bear its own costs, in the interest of harmonious implementation of the judgment
Although costs generally follow the event under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, the Court considered that the matter could have been resolved administratively had the Respondents acted timeously, and directed each party to bear its own costs to promote harmonious engagement in implementation of the judgment.
Legal principles established
#- Mandamus issues to compel performance of a public statutory duty where a party has a specific legal right and no other specific remedy
- Costs follow the event under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act unless the court for good reason orders otherwise
Court orders
#- 1.An order of mandamus compelling the 1st Respondent, the Land Registrar, Migori County, in collaboration with the 2nd Respondent, the County Surveyor, Migori County, to ascertain and fix the boundaries of Land Reference No. South Sakwa/Kogelo/486 and Land Reference No. Kanyamkago/Kawere I/3905 within thirty (30) days from the date thereof
- 2.The prayer for compensation is declined
- 3.Each party shall bear its own costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction under leave granted by the High Court/ELC (Ong'ondo, J., 14th August 2023) for orders of mandamus over land registration matters within the ELC's jurisdiction
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Land Registrar, Migori County & another; Adera (Ex parte) (Judicial Review Application 1 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 7188 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Migori ELC JR No. 1 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7188/eng@2025-10-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.