[2002] KEHC 267 (KLR)

[2002] KEHC 267 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant was the registered proprietor of the disputed parcels of land and that there was no clear or sufficient evidence presented by the respondent to prove that the parcels were government land. The cancellation of the applicant's titles by the Commissioner of Lands was carried out...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] KEHC 267 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Helena Kithinji; Respondent: The Attorney General
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 730 of 1989
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed. Declarations granted in favour of the applicant. Costs awarded to the applicant.
Legal Topics
Deprivation of Property, Right to Fair Hearing, Title Cancellation, Natural Justice
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Land and Property Deprivation of Property Right to Fair Hearing Title Cancellation Natural Justice

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Helena Kithinji

Applicant

The Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was unlawfully deprived of her property rights in contravention of section 75 of the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether the cancellation of the applicant's land titles by the Commissioner of Lands was illegal, unconstitutional, and in breach of natural justice.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to a declaration of ownership and compensation for the contravention of her constitutional rights.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was the registered proprietor of the disputed parcels of land and that there was no clear or sufficient evidence presented by the respondent to prove that the parcels were government land. The cancellation of the applicant's titles by the Commissioner of Lands was carried out without affording the applicant an opportunity to be heard, in violation of the rules of natural justice and section 75 of the Constitution. The court held that the government was obligated to follow due process before depriving a person of property rights. The administrative action of cancelling the titles was therefore illegal, invalid, and unconstitutional. The applicant remains...

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Declarations granted in favour of the applicant. Costs awarded to the applicant.

Orders

  • Declaration that the applicant was unlawfully deprived of her property rights in contravention of section 75 of the Constitution.
  • Declaration that the circular purporting to cancel the applicant's titles is illegal, unconstitutional, null and void.