[2011] KEHC 3796 (KLR)

[2011] KEHC 3796 (KLR)

The court found that the Land Disputes Tribunal and the Central Province Land Disputes Appeals Committee lacked jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes based on trust, as such matters are expressly excluded from the scope of the Land Disputes Tribunals Act. The respondent's claim was fundamentally one of trust, and therefore, the tribunal and appeals committee acted outside their statutory mandate. Consequently, the decisions of both the tribunal and the appeals committee were quashed and set aside. The court also noted that, given the familial nature of the dispute, each party should bear their own costs.

Citation
[2011] KEHC 3796 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Gachanja Gitau; Respondent: Mwangi Gitau
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
25 February 2011
Case Number
Civil Appeal 85 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal_allowed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Land Disputes Tribunals, Trusts in Land, Appeals Process
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of Land Disputes Tribunals Trusts in Land Appeals Process

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gachanja Gitau

Appellant

Mwangi Gitau

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Land Disputes Tribunal and Appeals Committee had jurisdiction to determine a claim based on trust.
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of limitation applies to claims of trust in land disputes.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent admitted the existence of a trust.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Land Disputes Tribunal and the Central Province Land Disputes Appeals Committee lacked jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes based on trust, as such matters are expressly excluded from the scope of the Land Disputes Tribunals Act. The respondent's claim was fundamentally one of trust, and therefore, the tribunal and appeals committee acted outside their statutory mandate. Consequently, the decisions of both the tribunal and the appeals committee were quashed and set aside. The court also noted that, given the familial nature of the dispute, each party should bear their own costs.

Court Disposition

appeal_allowed

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The decisions of the Murang'a Land Disputes Tribunal and the Central Province Land Disputes Appeals Committee are quashed and set aside.