Kimani & another v National Irrigation Authority & 7 others (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 8103 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court in Kerugoya dismissed a family challenge to a Mwea Irrigation Scheme land distribution, confirming that judicial review targets procedure, not outcome.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Arbitration Committee committed procedural impropriety or misconduct
The Committee acted procedurally and fairly; no bias, misconduct or impropriety was demonstrated.
The record of the proceedings before the Committee showed all parties were accorded a hearing. No evidence of bias or misconduct was adduced. The Committee dealt with entitlement to the 1 acre held in the deceased's name and distributed it amongst the Applicants. The process was neither irrational, unfair nor unreasonable, so the court would not interfere with the decision on judicial review.
Whether the Committee relied on an invalid Will
The Committee did not base its decision on the contested Will of 5th January 2015; it is not evident the Will was even tendered in evidence.
The court found from the record that the Committee's decision was not founded on the disputed Will. Moreover, the riceholding had been distributed during the deceased's lifetime in 2014, so the only portion available for succession was the 1 acre registered in her name, which the Committee distributed amongst the Applicants.
Whether the Applicants suffered discrimination contrary to Article 27 in the allocation of the riceholding
No finding of discrimination; the Committee distributed the available 1 acre amongst the Applicants, and the wider riceholding had been allocated in 2014 during the deceased's lifetime.
The Applicants argued allocation of 0.25 acres each versus 1.5 acres to Respondents was discriminatory. The court found the riceholding had been distributed to licensees including the deceased well before her death, leaving only 1 acre for succession, which the Committee distributed to the Applicants. The discrimination argument therefore failed with the dismissal of the application.
Legal principles established
#- Judicial review under Order 53 is concerned with the decision-making process (illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety), not the merits of the decision
- A tribunal that accords both parties a hearing and decides on the material before it satisfies the rules of natural justice and cannot be faulted
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion application dated 17th September 2024 is dismissed
- 2.Each party to bear their own costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 53 Rules 3(1) & (2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, following leave granted to institute Judicial Review proceedings
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kimani & another v National Irrigation Authority & 7 others (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 8103 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Judicial Review Notice of Motion dated 17th September 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/8103/eng@2025-11-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.