Rating Valuation Objections Under the Valuation for Rating Act

County governments in Kenya raise land rates from a valuation roll, and the figure on that roll determines what a property owner pays every year. For decades the roll was prepared and objected to under the Valuation for Rating Act (Cap 266) and its companion, the Rating Act (Cap 267). Both have now been repealed and replaced by the National Rating Act, 2024, which sets out a new procedure for preparing valuation rolls, objecting to them, and appealing a decision. Property owners, ratepayers and their advocates who still refer to “Cap 266 objections” need to understand what changed, because the timelines and forums are different from the old law.

From the Valuation for Rating Act to the National Rating Act 2024

Section 57 of the National Rating Act, 2024 (No. 15 of 2024) expressly repeals both the Rating Act and the Valuation for Rating Act. The new Act consolidates valuation and rating into a single national framework applicable across all forty-seven counties, rather than leaving each county to operate under the old, colonial-era statute. Section 5 sets out the scope of the Act: it applies to all rateable property within a county except freehold agricultural land, which remains outside the rating net. Section 2 defines “rateable property” as property on which a county government may levy a rate, excluding anything specifically exempted from rating.

This matters for anyone advising on a rating dispute today. Citing Cap 266 case law or procedure without checking whether it has been carried over into the 2024 Act risks giving advice based on a repealed regime.

Grounds on Which You Can Object to a Valuation

Section 36(1) of the National Rating Act sets out what a person may object to. An objection can be raised where a person is aggrieved by the inclusion of any rateable property in, or the omission of any rateable property from, the draft valuation roll, or by any value ascribed to a property in the roll, or by any other statement made or omitted in it. In practice this covers disputes over whether a parcel should appear on the roll at all, disputes over its recorded size, use or description, and disputes over the value itself, typically supported by comparable sales or an independent valuation. An objection under this section is not a vehicle for disputing the rate percentage set by the county assembly; it is confined to what appears in the valuation roll.

The Objection Procedure and Timelines

The process begins with publication. Section 35(3) requires the County Executive Committee member responsible for finance to publish a notice inviting members of the public to inspect the draft valuation roll and raise objections. From the date of that publication, section 36(1) gives an aggrieved person forty-five days to lodge an objection. Before the formal objection is filed, section 36(3) requires the objector to first file a notice of intention to lodge an objection, and section 36(2) requires the objection itself to be submitted on the prescribed Form 3, accompanied by a non-refundable fee.

Once an objection is filed, section 36(5) and (6) give the County Executive Committee member twenty-one days to notify the valuer who prepared the roll, and the valuer then has sixty days to respond. Section 36(7) requires the County Executive Committee member to constitute a County Valuation Board to determine the objection. The Act leaves the fine detail of that board to the counties: section 36(11) states that the composition and procedure of the County Valuation Board are to be specified in county legislation, so the make-up of the board (and how quickly it convenes) can differ from one county to the next.

The practical lesson is that the forty-five day window is unforgiving. Missing the notice of intention or the Form 3 deadline generally means living with the published valuation until the next revaluation cycle.

The National Rating Tribunal and Appeals to the Environment and Land Court

Beyond the county-level objection process, sections 39 and 40 establish a National Rating Tribunal to hear and determine matters relating to valuation and rating. Section 40(1) provides for a Tribunal of not more than fifteen members appointed by the Judicial Service Commission, made up of a chairperson and other members drawn from law, valuation and rating, and physical planning, among other named disciplines. Section 42(1) requires the Tribunal to determine matters lodged before it within six months of receipt, a firm timeline that did not exist under the old Cap 266 regime.

Section 55 provides that an appeal from a decision of the Tribunal lies to the Environment and Land Court. This gives a ratepayer a clear route from an unfavourable Tribunal decision into the court system, though it is worth noting that the Act does not spell out in detail how a County Valuation Board’s decision feeds into a Tribunal reference, so the exact sequencing should be checked against the specific county legislation and Tribunal rules once a dispute actually arises.

Practical Considerations for Property Owners

Section 30(1) requires a county government to prepare a new valuation roll every five years, with section 30(2) allowing an extension of up to two years subject to County Assembly approval. This cycle matters for planning: a property owner who does not object within the window after a roll is published is generally bound by that valuation for the life of the roll. Given the fee, the Form 3 requirement, and the short window, it is worth instructing a registered valuer early to build a case around comparable evidence rather than waiting until close to the forty-five day deadline.

It is also worth remembering that unpaid rates, whatever the valuation, expose a property to enforcement under the same Act, including the auction process that our companion article discusses in more depth.