George Kamau Kimani & 4 others v County Government of Trans-Nzoia & another [2016] KEELC 625 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court dismissed a second suit over Kitale's Cherangany Estate houses because the same dispute had already been decided, so the occupants cannot relitigate it.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the suit is res judicata
The suit is res judicata; the parties, subject matter (six leases over Cherangani Estate houses) and cause of action (notices issued 3/5/2013) are identical to Kitale ELC No. 66 of 2013, whose issues were heard and finally determined
The court compared the plaints in both suits and found them materially similar, both founded on the same leases and the same eviction notices. The former suit was struck out for non-compliance with the law and contained findings that the leases were unregistered and unenforceable, being findings on substance. The second defendant was found to have been added merely to create the appearance of new parties. The suit was filed in a court of competent jurisdiction. Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act therefore barred the present suit.
Whether the suit is an abuse of the process of the court
Yes; the suit was introduced to give life to an issue already determined, and the claim relating to the 9/6/2014 undertaking involved misjoinder of causes of action and should have been pleaded with particulars of duress in a separate suit
The plaintiffs executed a written undertaking, witnessed by their advocate Peter Kiarie, admitting the first defendant's ownership and promising to vacate by 11/6/2014. Instead of moving out, they filed this suit claiming the earlier suit was lost on technicalities. The court found the earlier suit was struck out for non-compliance with the law, not technicalities, and that introducing the undertaking into this suit served only to revive a determined issue.
Whether the prior ruling in Kitale ELC No. 66 of 2013 bound the parties
Yes; the ruling was delivered on 4/6/2014, no appeal was filed, and it contained binding findings on the validity of the leases
The defendant argued, and the court accepted in substance, that the earlier ruling's findings that the plaintiffs' leases were unregistered and lacked the corporation's seal were findings on substance. The plaintiffs did not appeal and remained in occupation relying on leases already held unenforceable, which the court treated as illegitimate.
Legal principles established
#- For res judicata to apply, the matter must be directly and substantially in issue in both suits, the parties must be the same or litigating under the same title, and the matter must have been finally decided in the previous suit
- The doctrine of res judicata is founded on public policy, aimed at finality of litigation and protection from being harassed twice with the same litigation
Court orders
#- 1.The plaintiffs' suit is dismissed for being res judicata and an abuse of the process of the court
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court (suit transferred from Kitale ELC); application under Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 2 rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "George Kamau Kimani & 4 others v County Government of Trans-Nzoia & another [2016] KEELC 625 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Eldoret Environment & Land Case (No. indicated as arising from transfer of Kitale ELC; application dated 5/6/2015). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2016/625/eng@2016-08-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.