Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in judgment· [2026] KEELC 53 (KLR)

Kibanga & 72 others v Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer-Taveta & 2 others (Environment and Land Petition E006 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 53 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
21 January 2026
EWE. K. Wabwoto
1,372 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court dismissed residents' bid to force disclosure of the Kachero Settlement Scheme beneficiary list because they never first used the Access to Information Act process.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court (E. K. Wabwoto, J) determines the Petitioners' notice of application dated 30th October 2025 in an ongoing petition concerning the Kachero Settlement Scheme on L.R No. 10287/7. The Petitioners, residents of the scheme, sought an order compelling the 1st Respondent to provide a certified copy of the list of beneficiaries from the sub-division of the scheme, alleging that the list excluded occupants of plots 1 to 116 and that the process lacked credibility and openness. They anchored the application on Article 35 of the Constitution and Sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act, submitting that the court's fundamental duty is to do justice. The Respondents opposed, arguing that the application was a delaying tactic, a fishing expedition to support an amendment of a prematurely drafted petition, and that the Petitioners had not invoked or complied with the Access to Information Act before seeking judicial intervention, contrary to the doctrine of exhaustion. The court framed the sole issue as whether the Petitioners had met the threshold for the reliefs sought. It held that a citizen seeking information under Article 35(1)(b) must show the information is held by the person from whom it is claimed and that it is required for the exercise or protection of another right, and must first comply with the procedure prescribed by the Access to Information Act, including review by the Commission on Administrative Justice and appeal to the High Court. Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Aluochier v Senate & 2 others, the court found the Petitioners had failed to demonstrate compliance with the statutory procedure. The application was dismissed with each party bearing its own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Petitioners met the threshold for an order compelling disclosure of the list of beneficiaries

Holding

The application failed because the Petitioners did not demonstrate compliance with the Access to Information Act procedure.

Reasoning

Article 35(1)(b) guarantees access to information held by another where required to exercise or protect a right, but enforcement is through the Access to Information Act. Sections 5, 14 and 20–23 set out the request, review and appeal procedures. The Supreme Court has held the statutory procedure must be complied with. The Petitioners never invoked or complied with those provisions before filing the application, so the threshold for the reliefs sought was not met.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A citizen seeking information under Article 35(1)(b) must show the information is held by the person from whom it is claimed and that it is required for the exercise or protection of another right.
  • The procedure under the Access to Information Act must be complied with before resorting to the court for information.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Petitioners' application dated 30th October 2025 is dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to bear own costs of the application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 35 (Article 35(1)(b))
  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A and 1B
  • Access to Information Act (Cap 31 of 2016, No. 31 of 2016)Sections 5, 9 to 15, 20 to 23

Cases cited (5)

  • Geoffrey Muthiga Kabiru versus Samuel Munga Henry and 1756 others
    2015 eKLR
  • Kenya Tea Development Agency Management Services Limited & another v AIG Kenya Insurance Company Limited
    [2022] KESC 662 (KLR)
  • Habiba Ali Mursai & 4 others v Mariam Noor Abdi
    [2021] KEELC 190 (KLR)
  • Aluochier v Senate & 2 others (Petition E014 of 2025)
    [2025] KESC 59 (KLR) (3 October 2025)
  • Communist Party of Kenya vs Nairobi Metropolitan Services & 3 Others
    [2022] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Original petition before the Environment and Land Court; application anchored on Article 35 of the Constitution and Sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kibanga & 72 others v Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer-Taveta & 2 others (Environment and Land Petition E006 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 53 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/53/eng@2026-01-21

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.