[2013] KEHC 3908 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 3908 (KLR)

The court found that the application for judicial review was filed outside the 21-day period stipulated in the order granting leave. The leave was granted on 14/2/2011, requiring filing by 7/3/2011, but the application was dated 8/3/2011 and filed on 11/3/2011. As a result, the application was improperly before the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 3908 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic of Kenya; Applicant: Nancy Muthoni Ndambiri; Respondent: Gichugu Land Disputes Tribunal; Respondent: Elitha Wakathaiya; Respondent: S.R.M. Gichugu Court
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Embu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application 71 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Judicial Review Application
Outcome
application dismissed as incompetent
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Tribunal Jurisdiction, Filing Timelines, Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Judicial Review Tribunal Jurisdiction Filing Timelines Land Disputes

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic of Kenya

Applicant

Nancy Muthoni Ndambiri

Applicant

Gichugu Land Disputes Tribunal

Respondent

Elitha Wakathaiya

Respondent

S.R.M. Gichugu Court

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Judicial Review Application

  1. 1 Whether the application for judicial review was filed within the 21-day period as directed by the order granting leave.
  2. 2 Whether the parties were wrongly intituled, rendering the application incompetent.
  3. 3 Whether the actions of the 1st Respondent were ultra vires their mandate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for judicial review was filed outside the 21-day period stipulated in the order granting leave. The leave was granted on 14/2/2011, requiring filing by 7/3/2011, but the application was dated 8/3/2011 and filed on 11/3/2011. As a result, the application was improperly before the court, lacking the requisite leave, and was therefore incompetent. The court declined to address the other issues regarding party citation and the tribunal's jurisdiction, as there was no competent application to consider. The application was dismissed with costs to the 2nd respondent, who was the only respondent to participate in the proceedings.

Court Disposition

application dismissed as incompetent

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs to Elitha Wakathaiya.
  • No orders are made concerning the 1st and 3rd Respondents.