Gunda (Suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of Banzi Gunda Banzi - Deceased) v Secretary National Land Commission (Environment and Land Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E004 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 151 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ordered the National Land Commission to pay Kshs 2.4 million plus interest within 60 days, confirming mandamus as the way to enforce judgments against government bodies.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.What is the scope, meaning and nature of the concept of Judicial Review?
- 2.Whether the judicial review suit instituted by the Applicant meets the threshold of such a suit and has merit whatsoever?
- 3.Whether the Applicant is entitled to the prerogative reliefs sought?
- 4.Who will bear the costs of the Application for Judicial Review?
Key legal issues
#Scope and nature of judicial review
Judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not the merits, and requires grounds of illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety plus locus standi and promptness
The court traced judicial review to Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Sections 8 and 9 of the Law Reform Act, and to Article 47 of the Constitution and the Fair Administrative Action Act. Relying on Gathenji and Pastoli, it held the applicant must show the impugned action is tainted with illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety and have sufficient interest and file promptly.
Whether the judicial review suit meets the threshold
The suit met the threshold: the applicant had locus standi, filed promptly and demonstrated illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety
The court found the applicant, as legal representative of the deceased's estate under a limited grant ad litem, had a valid decree from the Land Acquisition Tribunal, a certificate of order issued under Section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act, and that the Respondent's failure to pay despite service established administrative inaction contrary to Article 47 and undermined access to justice under Article 48.
Whether mandamus should issue against the Secretary, National Land Commission
Mandamus should and did issue compelling the Respondent as Accounting Officer to pay the decretal sum
The court applied Gathenji, Schon Noorani and Five Star Agencies to hold that a valid decree and certificate of order existed, were served on the Respondent, and that refusal to pay despite service breached a mandatory statutory duty under Section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act. Execution not lying against the Government, mandamus was the only effective remedy; the decree being unchallenged, it could not be left a paper judgment.
Costs
Costs follow the event; the successful Ex-parte Applicant was entitled to costs borne by the Respondent
Applying Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and authority that costs follow the event and serve to compensate the successful party, the court found the application meritorious and awarded costs to the Applicant, to be agreed or taxed by the Deputy Registrar.
Legal principles established
#- Where execution cannot issue against the Government, a decree-holder may enforce payment by mandamus against the Accounting Officer
- The statutory duty of the Accounting Officer under Section 21(3) of the Government Proceedings Act is not conditional upon budgetary allocation or parliamentary approval
Court orders
#- 1.A judicial review order - prerogative writ in the nature of Mandamus issued compelling the Respondent, the Secretary and Accounting Officer of the National Land Commission, to pay the Ex-parte Applicant Kshs. 2,427,734/- being the decretal amount together with interest at the court rate of 12% per annum from the date of award until payment in full
- 2.Payment shall be processed and paid out to the Ex-parte Applicant WITHIN 60 DAYS from the date of the judgment, in default of which the Ex-parte Applicant shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps including citation for contempt
- 3.Costs of the proceedings awarded to the Ex-parte Applicant
- 4.Such costs to be agreed upon, and in default, to be taxed by the Deputy Registrar of the Court
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, 2010; Sections 8 and 9 of the Law Reform Act (Cap. 26); Article 47 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 (original supervisory jurisdiction over administrative action)
Relief refused
#Judgment described as 'partly entered' though all heads of relief sought (mandamus and costs) were granted
The court framed its disposition as partial entry of judgment without identifying any head of relief refused
Costs
Costs of the proceedings awarded to the Ex-parte Applicant, to be agreed upon and in default taxed by the Deputy Registrar of the Court
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.
The Honourable Court be pleased to issue a judicial review order – Prerogative writs in the nature of Mandamus to compel the Respondent, the Secretary and Accounting Oficer of the National Land Commission, to pay the Ex ‑ parte Applicant the sum of Kenya Shillings Two Million Four Hundred and Twenty‑Seven Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty‑Four (Kshs. 2,427,734/-)
The payment at the foot of clause (i) shall be processed and paid out to the Ex ‑ Parte Applicant WITHIN 60 DAYS from the date hereof, and in default the Ex ‑ Parte Applicant shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps including but not limited to citation for contempt.
That the costs of the proceedings herein be and are hereby awarded to the Ex ‑ Parte Applicant.
any person who walks through the doors of the court and procures a Judgment must be assured that the Judgment, [if any] obtained means something. Furthermore, such a judgment will be enforced in accordance with the law.
Since execution cannot issue against the Government, mandamus is the only efiective remedy available to the Applicant.
It is clear beyond any peradventure that the procedure to be followed in execution against the government is to seek an order of Mandamus to compel the relevant person in the Government to settle the decree in question.
Issues in the judgment
#The tribunal decretal sum is inconsistently stated: 'Kshs. 1, 127, 034/=' in the statutory statement versus 'Kshs. 1,022,734/=' in the verifying affidavit and the judgment's merits analysis
The total sum claimed is variously written as 'Two Million Four Hundred and Twenty Seven Thousand and fourteen shillings', 'Kshs. 2, 427, 734/=' and 'Two Million Four Hundred and Twenty Seven Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty-Four' in different passages
The arithmetic of the cumulative total is doubtful: 1,022,734 plus 50,000 special damages plus 127,000 taxed costs does not equal 2,427,734
The Respondent is described as established under Article 63 of the Constitution, which deals with community land, not the establishment of the National Land Commission (Article 67)
Issue headings are mislabeled: issue (c) 'entitled to prerogative reliefs' and issue (d) on costs are both headed 'ISSUE No. c)'
Although the application sought only leave to commence judicial review, the court granted the substantive mandamus relief and described the judgment as 'partly entered' without explaining what part was refused
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Gunda (Suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of Banzi Gunda Banzi - Deceased) v Secretary National Land Commission (Environment and Land Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E004 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 151 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Chamber Summons Application dated 19th August 2024 (Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/151/eng@2026-01-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.