[2024] KEELC 7425 (KLR)

[2024] KEELC 7425 (KLR)

The court held that the petitioners have a constitutional right under Articles 22 and 258 to institute proceedings alleging contravention or threatened contravention of the Constitution, including in matters concerning public land. The presence of statutory bodies such as the EACC and NLC does not preclude...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEELC 7425 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Magare-Gikenyi B; Applicant: Dishon Mogire Keroti; Applicant: Pauline Nduta Kinyanjui; Applicant: Philomon Abuga Nyakundi; Applicant: Shallum Kaka Nyaundi; Applicant: Agnes Wanzuu Waambua; Applicant: Semere Godwill; Applicant: Mark Fortune Omondi; Respondent: Wilson Gacanja; Respondent: Elizabeth Gitiri Gacanja; Respondent: Soneth Limited; Respondent: National Land Commission; Respondent: County Executive Committee Member, Built Environment & Urban Planning, Nairobi City County; Respondent: Nairobi City County; Respondent: Chief Land Registrar; Respondent: Chief Land Surveyor; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission; Respondent: Law Society of Kenya; Respondent: Kituo cha Sheria; Respondent: Katiba Institute
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Petition E073 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection dismissed
Judges
MD Mwangi
Legal Topics
Public Land Allocation, Locus Standi, Doctrine of Exhaustion, Constitutional Right of Access to Court
Source Language
en
Land and Property Constitutional Law Public Land Allocation Locus Standi Doctrine of Exhaustion Constitutional Right of Access to Court

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Magare-Gikenyi B

Applicant

Dishon Mogire Keroti

Applicant

Pauline Nduta Kinyanjui

Applicant

Philomon Abuga Nyakundi

Applicant

Shallum Kaka Nyaundi

Applicant

Agnes Wanzuu Waambua

Applicant

Semere Godwill

Applicant

Mark Fortune Omondi

Applicant

Wilson Gacanja

Respondent

Elizabeth Gitiri Gacanja

Respondent

Soneth Limited

Respondent

National Land Commission

Respondent

County Executive Committee Member, Built Environment & Urban Planning, Nairobi City County

Respondent

Nairobi City County

Respondent

Chief Land Registrar

Respondent

Chief Land Surveyor

Respondent

Attorney General

Respondent

Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission

Respondent

Law Society of Kenya

Respondent

Kituo cha Sheria

Respondent

Katiba Institute

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the petitioners have locus standi to institute proceedings regarding alleged unlawful allocation of public land.
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of exhaustion and ripeness bars the petitioners from approaching the court before pursuing remedies before statutory bodies.
  3. 3 Whether the existence of constitutional and statutory bodies (EACC, NLC) precludes direct court action by public-spirited citizens.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the petitioners have a constitutional right under Articles 22 and 258 to institute proceedings alleging contravention or threatened contravention of the Constitution, including in matters concerning public land. The presence of statutory bodies such as the EACC and NLC does not preclude public-spirited individuals from seeking judicial redress. The doctrines of exhaustion and ripeness do not bar the petitioners from accessing the court in this context, as the Constitution expressly provides for such access. The preliminary objection, which sought to strike out the petition on grounds of prematurity and failure to exhaust alternative remedies, was therefore without...

Court Disposition

preliminary objection dismissed

Orders

  • The preliminary objection by the 3rd respondent is dismissed with costs to the petitioners.