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

Mwambamba v Kenya Wildlife Service (Tribunal Appeal 22 of 2021) [2022] KENET 706 (KLR) (Civ) (6 September 2022) (Ruling)

[2022] KENET 706 (KLR) KENET
Read PDF
Court
KENET
Case number
706
Citation
[2022] KENET 706 (KLR)
Decided
6 September 2022
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppeal from the rejection of a claim for compensation by Kenya Wildlife ServiceCoramMohammed S Balala, Christine Mwikali Kipsang, Bahati Mwamuye, Waithaka Ngariya, Kariuki Muigua
Holding

The tribunal dismissed the appeal and allowed the respondent's preliminary objection.

Facts

The appellant, Gilbert Ngeti Mwambamba, claims to have been attacked by a lion on September 16, 2015, while grazing in his farm at Mwakiki village. The Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) rejected his claim for compensation.

Issues

  1. Whether the appeal is time barred
  2. Whether the tribunal has jurisdiction
  3. What orders should the tribunal make

Reasoning

The tribunal found the appeal time barred due to the respondent's preliminary objection based on section 25(6) of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act, and the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain a time barred appeal.

Outcome

The appeal was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Orders

  • The respondent’s preliminary objection is hereby allowed
  • The appeal is hereby dismissed
  • Each party to bear their own costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Wildlife Conservation and Management Act (No 47 of 2013)
  • Environmental and Management Act (EMCA)
Cases cited (1)
  • Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Co Ltd v West End Distributors Limited
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