An advocate of the High Court of Kenya, Ronald Ong’udi, has outlined the challenges surrounding property dispute resolution in the country, highlighting issues of inheritance, land use, and adverse possession.
Speaking on Friday, Ong’udi explained that delays in land disputes often stem from inadequate planning, poor documentation, emotional conflict, and deliberate attempts to frustrate legal processes.
According to Ong’udi, Kenyan society does not prioritize estate planning, leaving complex disputes when individuals pass away.
“Once we die, there is a lot of chaos that is left behind, and this chaos has to be resolved by judges,” he said.
Courts are often tasked with arbitrating between heirs, some of whom may feel entitled to inheritance despite limited legal claim.
DNA tests, emotional disputes, and disagreements over extended family entitlements further prolong resolution.
Court delays are compounded by appeals filed after initial rulings. A decision by a High Court judge can be challenged in the Court of Appeal, significantly extending the process.
Documentation issues also play a key role, with parties intentionally dragging proceedings to buy time or strengthen their position.
Ong’udi noted that the judiciary is addressing backlog challenges by recruiting additional judges, but full resolution remains a long-term goal.
Squatters and adverse possession also contribute to the complexity of land ownership disputes.
A squatter occupies land without consent from the owner, and while continuous occupation for 12 years can allow a claim to ownership, initial possession without the owner’s knowledge does not grant rights.
This legal principle ensures owners retain the ability to protect their property, but it also requires careful court adjudication when long-term occupation is involved.
Land use disputes, such as disagreements between co-owners on commercial versus agricultural use, are typically handled by liaison committees established across Kenya’s 47 counties.
These committees hear disputes and, if unsatisfied, parties can appeal to the Land Acquisition Tribunal.
The law requires resolution based on intended use and legality, but disagreements persist due to cultural expectations and differing interpretations of entitlements.
Ong’udi also highlighted the importance of public participation in property and infrastructure matters.
“Before we even get to the point of seeking and trying to talk about ways in which you want to implement it, public participation must be at the heart of it,” he said.
Courts increasingly scrutinize projects where public input is minimal, reflecting constitutional imperatives under Article 10 of the Kenyan Constitution.
Another legal principle affecting land ownership is the “root of title” doctrine, emphasized in the Supreme Court’s Dinner Management decision.
The ruling reaffirms that ownership must be traced to a lawful origin, and any illegal passage of title can nullify claims, even if subsequent transactions were made in good faith.
This protects public land and ensures that unlawful annexations are reversible, reinforcing legal safeguards against fraudulent property claims.
Ultimately, property dispute resolution in Kenya involves navigating inheritance complexities, adverse possession, land use disagreements, and systemic court delays.
Ong’udi stresses that while laws exist to provide clarity, cultural expectations, greed, and poor planning frequently challenge the legal framework, highlighting the need for greater public education, efficient judicial processes, and adherence to legal principles to ensure fairness and timely resolution.
