SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Ratanya v North & 3 others; Muthami, the personal representative of Simon Muthamia Iguatho (Deceased) (Interested Party) (Civil Appeal 2 of 2018) [2024] KECA 1002 (KLR) (24 May 2024) (Judgment)

[2024] KECA 1002 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
1002
Citation
[2024] KECA 1002 (KLR)
Decided
24 May 2024
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from the judgment of the Environment and Land CourtCoramAO MUCHELULE, E.C Cherono, E.C. Cherono, F. Gikonyo, Mativo
Holding

The court dismissed the appeal, finding that the ELC exercised its discretion in dismissing the appellant's objection and that the appellant was not entitled to the orders of certiorari and prohibition sought.

Facts

Domiziano M. Ratanya filed a judicial review application against the decision of the Land Adjudication Ocer of Igembe/Tigania/Uringu Adjudication Section dismissing his objection No. 834/1996 to the Adjudication Register. The 2nd respondent, the Director, Land Adjudication and Settlement Nairobi, dismissed Ratanya's absence from the hearing.

Issues

  1. Whether the appellant is deserving of the order of certiorari as sought before the trial court.
  2. Whether the ELC's decision to dismiss the appellant's objection was procedurally fair.

Reasoning

The court held that judicial review matters are discretionary and that the ELC was not required to hear the appellant before dismissing his objection. The court also noted that the ELC's decision was not an appealable decision.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Land Consolidation Act
  • Judicial Review Act
Cases cited (3)
  • Shah v Mbogo
  • Municipal Council of Mombasa vs Republic & Umoja Consultants Ltd
  • Republic v Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal Ex parte Apollo Mboya
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case