Environment and Land Court issues interim orders blocking enforcement of disputed charges pending hearing of petition
The Kajiado Environment and Land Court has temporarily stopped the Kajiado County Government from enforcing new land rates and rent introduced under the Kajiado County Finance Act, 2026, pending the hearing of a petition challenging their legality.
The interim orders suspend the implementation and enforcement of Sections 14(8), 14(9) and 14(13), together with the Tenth Schedule of the Finance Act, which provide for land rates on rateable properties and rent payable by holders of allotted properties.
The case was filed by Sheria Mtaani together with several residents’ associations, with lawyer Shadrack Wambui representing the petitioners.
The petitioners argue that the county government cannot lawfully impose the disputed charges without first preparing, publishing, validating and operationalising a valuation roll in accordance with the National Rating Act, 2024.
According to the petitioners, no such valuation roll has been prepared or operationalised, making it difficult for property owners to establish the basis on which the county calculated the amounts being demanded.
Wambui argues in the supporting affidavit that the county proceeded to impose the rates without the statutory valuation process, leaving property owners without a clear methodology for determining their liabilities.
Previous court ruling
The latest challenge comes against the backdrop of an earlier Kajiado Environment and Land Court judgment involving similar land-rate and rent disputes.
In January 2026, the court in Sheria Mtaani and Shadrack Wambui v Kajiado County Assembly and another declared certain provisions of the Kajiado County Finance Act, 2023, relating to land rates unconstitutional and null and void.
The court found that the county had not complied with statutory requirements concerning valuation rolls and public participation. It also quashed the imposition and variation of certain rates and rent charges.
The petitioners in the latest case argue that similar legal issues have arisen under the 2026 Finance Act.
They have also challenged other aspects of the new charges, including a 25 per cent annual penalty on unpaid rates, according to reports on the court proceedings.
The latest orders are interim in nature. The court has not yet made a final determination on whether the disputed provisions of the Kajiado County Finance Act, 2026, are lawful.
The petition will now proceed for hearing and determination.
