Republic v District Land Registrar Bondo & 2 others Ex-parte Chairman, Management Committee of Orengo Catholic Church , Ambrose Dennis Achieng [2017] KEELC 3722 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The court dismissed a church's attempt to reclaim land because it filed its judicial review case over six years late, past Kenya's strict six-month deadline.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Fair hearing in adjudication objection proceedings
The Applicant was afforded a fair hearing; the church was represented and heard during the objection proceedings
The record of the objection proceedings showed the church was represented by Vitalis Okere Adede who was heard, and this deposition was not challenged. Nothing in the proceedings supported the claim that the church sought and was denied time to present other witnesses. The decision was rendered under Section 26(2) of the Land Adjudication Act.
Identity of the officer who heard the objection
The objection proceedings were heard and determined by the Land Adjudication Officer, not the Land Demarcation Officer
The initials 'L.A.O' appearing on the proceedings and decision could only be understood to refer to Land Adjudication Officer, not Land Demarcation Officer. The Applicant produced no documentary evidence proving the proceedings were before a Demarcation Officer, and the District Adjudication Officer's letter did not state otherwise.
Powers of the Land Adjudication Officer under Section 11(b)
The Land Adjudication Officer exceeded his powers in purporting to nullify the objection proceedings by letter of 5th June 2001, which was null and void ab initio
Section 11(b) empowers only the correction of errors or supply of omissions in the adjudication register. Disputes over objections under Section 26 are catered for by appeals to the Minister under Section 29. The nullification letter was therefore ultra vires.
Statutory limitation for judicial review leave
The notice of motion was statute barred, having been filed more than six months after both the decision of 12th April 2001 and the registration of 10th November 2010
Section 9(3) of the Law Reform Act and Order 53 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules require leave applications within six months. The church knew of the decision in May 2001 and of the registration in February 2011, yet the chamber summons for leave was filed on 6th October 2011, outside the period from either date.
Legal principles established
#- The six-month period prescribed by statute for applying for leave to apply for judicial review cannot be extended
- The power under Section 11(b) of the Land Adjudication Act to correct errors does not extend to nullifying objection proceedings decided under Section 26
- Where proceedings are brought under Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules, they are not founded on alleged violation of fundamental rights under Article 22(1) and 23(2)(f) of the Constitution
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion dated 19th October 2011 is dismissed
- 2.Costs awarded to the 3rd Respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review under Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Law Reform Act (Certiorari and Prohibition)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v District Land Registrar Bondo & 2 others Ex-parte Chairman, Management Committee of Orengo Catholic Church , Ambrose Dennis Achieng [2017] KEELC 3722 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). ELC Judicial Review Case No. 1A of 2016 (Formerly High Court Judicial Review Case No. 45 of 2011). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/3722/eng@2017-02-01
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.