Rampai Ole Saidimu v District Land Registrar & 4 others Ex parte Rampai Ole Saidimu [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Environment and Land Court at Kajiado
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Hon. Christine Ochieng
Judgment Date
October 05, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the 2020 eKLR case summary of Rampai Ole Saidimu v District Land Registrar & 4 others, detailing key legal principles and outcomes relevant to land registration disputes.


Case Brief: Rampai Ole Saidimu v District Land Registrar & 4 others Ex parte Rampai Ole Saidimu [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: RAMPAL OLE SAIDIMU v. THE DISTRICT LAND REGISTRAR & Others
- Case Number: MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18 OF 2018
- Court: Environment and Land Court at Kajiado
- Date Delivered: October 5, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Hon. Christine Ochieng
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issue presented before the court is whether the Ex parte Applicant, RAMPAL OLE SAIDIMU, is entitled to leave to commence judicial review proceedings for orders of Mandamus and Prohibition against the 1st Respondent, compelling him to take appropriate action to prevent the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Respondents from encroaching on the Applicant's land.

3. Facts of the Case:
RAMPAL OLE SAIDIMU, the Ex parte Applicant, is the registered proprietor of land parcel number Kajiado/Purko/452, which borders the land parcel owned by the 4th Respondent, Kajiado/Purko/453. The Applicant has been embroiled in a boundary dispute with the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Respondents over the exact location of their shared boundary, which has led to continuous encroachment on his land. Despite lodging formal complaints and conducting several surveys, including one by the District Land Surveyor in 2004 and another in 2016, the issue remains unresolved, with the 1st Respondent, the District Land Registrar, allegedly failing to perform his public duty to enforce the boundary determinations.

4. Procedural History:
The Ex parte Applicant filed an Amended Chamber Summons application on June 11, 2018, seeking leave to apply for orders of Mandamus and Prohibition. The application was unopposed, and the court's determination focused on whether the Applicant was entitled to leave to commence judicial review proceedings. The court reviewed the submitted affidavits and reports, noting the prolonged nature of the boundary dispute and the inaction of the 1st Respondent in enforcing the determined boundaries.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered the provisions of Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010, Section 8 & 9 of the Law Reform Act Cap 26, and the Fair Administrative Action Act 2015 of the Laws of Kenya. These statutes provide the framework for judicial review, particularly concerning the issuance of orders of Mandamus and Prohibition to compel public officers to perform their duties.
- Case Law: The court referenced the case of Republic vs. County Council of Kwale & Another Ex Parte Kondo & 57 Others (Mombasa HCMCA No. 384 of 1996), which established the parameters for granting leave for judicial review. The ruling emphasized the need for an arguable case for further investigation at a full hearing.
- Application: The court applied the aforementioned rules and case law to the facts of the case, concluding that the Ex parte Applicant had established a prima facie case justifying the issuance of leave for judicial review. The court noted the lack of action from the 1st Respondent despite the clear directives from the District Land Surveyor and the prolonged nature of the dispute.

6. Conclusion:
The court granted the Ex parte Applicant leave to commence judicial review proceedings for Mandamus and Prohibition, allowing the leave to operate as a stay pending the determination of the substantive motion. This ruling underscores the importance of public officers fulfilling their duties in accordance with established boundaries and legal determinations.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the ruling, as the application was unopposed, and the court's decision was unanimous based on the presented facts and legal principles.

8. Summary:
The court's ruling in RAMPAL OLE SAIDIMU v. THE DISTRICT LAND REGISTRAR & Others highlights the necessity for public officials to act on boundary disputes and enforce legal determinations. The case emphasizes the role of judicial review in ensuring that administrative actions are conducted fairly and in accordance with the law, thereby protecting property rights and upholding the principles of natural justice.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Rampai-Ole-Saidimu-v-District-Land-Registrar--4-others-Ex-parte-Rampai-Ole-Saidimu-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1271_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries