Law Society of Kenya v Commissioner of Lands & 2 others [2004] KECA 48 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal froze any transfer of Eldoret land housing the High Court, ruling the Law Society of Kenya's challenge deserved a full hearing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Law Society of Kenya has an arguable appeal against the ruling that it lacked locus standi
- 2.Whether success in the intended appeal would be rendered nugatory if the status quo sought is not granted
Key legal issues
#Arguability of the appeal on the Society's locus standi
The Society raised arguable points: as a statutory body under the Law Society of Kenya Act, Cap 18, it need not sue under the Societies Act, and its interests could merge with those of the Judiciary in preserving the land on which the Eldoret High Court stands.
The court identified the Society as a statutory body corporate with a common seal, so the preliminary objection holding that it had no locus standi was arguable. It also found the Society's interest in preserving the land housing the High Court arguable. Only two arguable points were needed and the court declined to explore more.
Nugatory-ness of the intended appeal
Success in the intended appeal would be rendered nugatory if the status quo was not maintained, because alienation of the plots would divest the High Court building land to a third party.
The court reasoned that if the parcels were alienated to Lima Limited, the High Court building would belong to someone else, an outcome that could not be allowed to happen pending the appeal. The nugatory limb was therefore satisfied without difficulty, justifying maintenance of the status quo.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant under rule 5(2)(b) must demonstrate both an arguable appeal and that success in the intended appeal would be rendered nugatory if the order sought is not granted.
- An arguable appeal need not be multiplicious; a single or few good arguable points suffice.
Court orders
#- 1.Status quo now obtaining to remain in force pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal
- 2.Costs of the application to be costs in the intended appeal
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nakuru (delivered at Nairobi)
- H.C.C.C. No. 464 of 2000
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
At this stage we only have to decide if the Society has an arguable appeal and whether success in the intended appeal would be rendered nugatory if the status quo sought is not granted.
Considering all the circumstances of the matter before us we order that the status quo now obtaining do remain in force pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal.
We need go no further into other arguable point or points. The two pointed out by us are enough.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Law Society of Kenya v Commissioner of Lands & 2 others [2004] KECA 48 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2003). Civil Application No. NAI. 181 of 2002. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2004/48/eng@2004-02-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.