Republic v Chairman -National Land Commission Lamu District Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer Ex-Parte Mohamed A. Haron [2014] KEELC 301 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court kept a freeze on Manda Island land adjudication and allowed the surveying committee to join the case, with each side paying its own costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the court should set aside the order staying the adjudication process on Manda Island pending the determination of the Motion
- 2.Whether the Intended Interested Party should be granted leave to appear and be heard in opposition to the Notice of Motion
Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction to set aside ex-parte stay orders granted under Order 53 Rule 4
The court retains jurisdiction, under Order 53 Rule 4 and its inherent jurisdiction, to set aside or maintain ex-parte stay orders depending on the circumstances of each case.
Order 53 Rule 4 permits leave to operate as a stay until the judge orders otherwise. The Court of Appeal in Njuguna v Minister of Agriculture and Aga Khan Education Service Kenya established that an ex-parte grant of leave may be challenged before the judge who granted it, or another judge, and that ex-parte orders are provisional. Grounds for setting aside include material non-disclosure or misleading the court, none of which was established here.
Whether the stay of the Manda Island adjudication process should be discharged
The stay was properly granted and was to remain in place pending determination of the main Motion, since the settlement process was ongoing and the issues raised by the Ex-parte Applicant required determination.
The Respondents are mandated by the Constitution, the Land Act and the National Land Commission Act to settle people on public land. The Ex-parte Applicant objected to the manner in which the Respondents and the Interested Party were settling residents and issuing titles, alleging irregularity. Since that process was alleged to be ongoing, the court held it should be stayed until the substantive issues were heard; merits would be determined at trial.
Joinder of the Intended Interested Party
The Manda Surveying Project Committee was granted leave to appear and be heard in opposition to the main Motion, there being no opposition to its joinder.
Counsel for the Ex-parte Applicant expressly did not oppose the joinder. The Local Committee had admitted in its affidavits involvement in the land adjudication process on behalf of Manda Island residents, giving it an interest in the proceedings. Arguments about the absence of a reviewable decision were reserved for opposition to the main Motion.
Legal principles established
#- Ex-parte orders granted under Order 53 may be set aside by the judge who granted them or another judge of the superior court in appropriate circumstances, including material non-disclosure or intentional misleading of the court
- Leave for judicial review is granted where there is an arguable case, without the court going into the matter in depth; ex-parte orders are provisional and may be set aside
Court orders
#- 1.The Intended Interested Party's Application dated 11th December 2013 allowed in terms of prayer (1) only - leave granted to the Manda Surveying Project Committee to appear and be heard in opposition to the Notice of Motion dated 7th November 2013
- 2.The order staying the Manda Island Adjudication process to remain in place until the suit is heard and determined
- 3.Each party to bear his own costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules (judicial review jurisdiction of the High Court); constitutional mandate under the Constitution, the Land Act and the National Land Commission Act
Relief refused
#Discharge of the ex-parte order staying the Manda Island Adjudication process (prayer 2)
The court held the stay was properly granted and should remain in force pending determination of the main Motion
Costs of the application (prayer 3)
Each party directed to bear own costs
Costs
Each party shall bear his costs (each party to bear their own costs).
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In the circumstances and for the reasons I have given, I allow the Intended Interested Party's Application dated 11th December 2013 in terms of prayer (1) only.
The order staying the Manda Island Adjudication process shall remain in place until the suit is heard and determined. Each party shall bear his costs.
The circumstances for setting aside will vary from one case to another and would include material non-disclosure or where the ex-parte Applicant intentionally misleads the court on matters of fact and or law.
The merits and demerits of the Applicant's case can only be determined after trial.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment does not state the full names of the Ex-parte Applicant or the Respondents; the caption identifies the parties only by description
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Chairman -National Land Commission Lamu District Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer Ex-Parte Mohamed A. Haron [2014] KEELC 301 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Judicial Review Application dated 11th December 2013 (arising from Ex-parte Applicant's Notice of Motion dated 29th October 2013). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2014/301/eng@2014-06-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.