[2019] KEELC 1680 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 1680 (KLR)

The court found that the petitioner is the registered proprietor of the suit property, holding a valid and indefeasible leasehold title. The respondents' actions in entering, occupying, and converting the property for public use without following the constitutional and statutory procedures for compulsory...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 1680 (KLR)
Parties
Petitioner: Anthony Milimu Lubulellah; Respondent: County Government of Kakamega; Respondent: Land Registrar Kakamega County; Respondent: Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 8 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
Petition allowed in part. Declaration of violation of Article 40(3) granted. Respondents ordered to compensate petitioner. Costs to petitioner. Claims for mesne profits and general damages denied.
Judges
NA Matheka
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition, Indefeasibility of Title, Right to Property, Public Use Without Compensation, Fair Administrative Action, Limitation of Actions
Source Language
en
Land and Property Constitutional Law Compulsory Acquisition Indefeasibility of Title Right to Property Public Use Without Compensation Fair Administrative Action Limitation of Actions

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Milimu Lubulellah

Petitioner

County Government of Kakamega

Respondent

Land Registrar Kakamega County

Respondent

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petition is statutorily time barred.
  2. 2 Whether the title of the suit land held by the petitioner is valid and lawful.
  3. 3 Whether the petitioner’s fundamental rights and freedoms have been infringed upon.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the petitioner is the registered proprietor of the suit property, holding a valid and indefeasible leasehold title. The respondents' actions in entering, occupying, and converting the property for public use without following the constitutional and statutory procedures for compulsory acquisition, and without compensating the petitioner, amounted to a violation of Article 40(3) of the Constitution. The court rejected the respondents' argument that the petition was time-barred, holding that constitutional claims for violation of rights are not subject to statutory limitation periods, though delay may be considered. The court also found that the respondents failed to...

Court Disposition

Petition allowed in part. Declaration of violation of Article 40(3) granted. Respondents ordered to compensate petitioner. Costs to petitioner. Claims for mesne profits and general damages denied.

Orders

  • A declaration is issued that the entry onto, occupation and acquisition of the suit property is in contravention and violation of Article 40(3) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 and therefore wrongful, illegal and unconstitutional.
  • The respondents are ordered to adequately compensate the petitioner for compulsorily acquiring his property.