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

Republic v Cabinet Secretary, Ministry of Land & Physical Planning & 3 others; Mugo (Exparte Applicant); Kamumo & another (Interested Parties) (Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E008 of 2023) [2023] KEELC 19067 (KLR) (26 July 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEELC 19067 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
19067
Citation
[2023] KEELC 19067 (KLR)
Decided
26 July 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial Review Miscellaneous ApplicationPostureApplication for leave to institute judicial review proceedings out of time and for an order of certiorariCoramC.K YANO
Holding

The application is out of time and the ex-parte applicant is not entitled to the orders sought.

Facts

The ex-parte applicant sought leave to institute judicial review proceedings out of time and for an order of certiorari to quash the decision made by the 1st respondent in respect of land Parcel 537 Kamwimbi A Adjudication Section in the Minister Appeal 417 of 2011.

Issues

  1. Whether the ex-parte applicant's application is competent
  2. Whether the applicant is entitled to the orders sought

Reasoning

The application for leave to apply for orders of certiorari is out of time as it was filed more than six months after the decision. The court held that the application for leave cannot be extended due to the limitation period provided in the Law Reform Act.

Outcome

The application is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to apply for orders of certiorari is dismissed as it is out of time.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Law Reform Act, Cap 26, Laws of Kenya
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Cases cited (2)
  • Wilson Osolo v John Ojiambo Ochola & another [1996] eKLR
  • Republic v Chairman Amagoro Land Dispute Tribunal & another Ex-parte Paul Mafwabi Wanyama [2014] eKLR
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