Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedApplication dated 5.6.2015 (Eldoret Environment and Land Court)· [2016] KEELC 999 (KLR)

Veronicah R. Cherono v Joseph Ruto Cherono [2016] KEELC 999 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
29 January 2016
1,178 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan land suit filed in the Magistrate's Court without jurisdiction cannot simply be transferred to the Environment and Land Court — it must be filed afresh.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicant sought transfer of Principal Magistrate's Court Case No. 10 of 2014 to the Environment and Land Court, Eldoret, on the basis of consent between the parties and jurisdictional doubts about the Magistrate's Court. The application, supported by the affidavit of Michael K. Chemwok, invoked Article 159 of the Constitution and sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act. The respondent opposed, arguing that a matter filed in a court without jurisdiction is not transferable and the application was made in bad faith. The court, Ombwayo J, analysed Articles 162(2)(b) and 169 of the Constitution: Parliament established the Environment and Land Court under the Environment and Land Court Act No. 12 of 2012 as the competent forum for land and environment disputes, and no enabling legislation then conferred such jurisdiction on the Magistrate's Court. The court held that the suit had been filed in breach of Article 162(2)(b) and that it had no power to transfer a suit filed in contravention of the Constitution and the Environment and Land Court Act. The court acknowledged the subsequent amendment of section 26 of the Environment and Land Court Act and the enactment of the Magistrates' Court Act, 2015 conferring limited land jurisdiction on magistrates, but held that the application was filed and argued before those changes and the new laws were not for determination, while noting the applicant may benefit from them. The application was not allowed with costs to the respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction of the Magistrate's Court over land matters prior to the Magistrates' Court Act, 2015

Holding

The Magistrate's Court had no jurisdiction to entertain land matters; the suit was filed in breach of Article 162(2)(b) and cannot be transferred

Reasoning

Article 162(2)(b) required Parliament to establish courts with the status of the High Court for environment and land disputes, which it did through the Environment and Land Court Act. Article 169(2) required separate legislation conferring jurisdiction on subordinate courts. Before the 2015 amendment to section 26 and the Magistrates' Court Act, there was no enabling legislation authorizing filing of land suits in the Magistrate's Court. A contravention cannot be cured by transfer.

p. 2
02

Effect of the subsequent amendment of section 26 of the Environment and Land Court Act and enactment of the Magistrates' Court Act, 2015

Holding

The new laws did not apply to this application since it was filed and argued before their enactment, though the applicant may benefit from them going forward

Reasoning

The court acknowledged the amendment introducing designated magistrates for environment and land matters and appeals lying to the Environment and Land Court. However, the application was filed and argued before the enactment, so the new laws were not the subject of determination, though the applicant may still benefit from them in future proceedings.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A land/environment suit filed in the Magistrate's Court after the establishment of the Environment and Land Court is filed in breach of Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and cannot be transferred to the Environment and Land Court

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 5.6.2015 seeking transfer of Principal Magistrate's Court Case No. 10 of 2014 to the Environment and Land Court, Eldoret is not allowed
  2. 2.Costs to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 159, 162(1), 162(2)(b), 169(1), 169(2)
  • Environment and Land Court Act No. 12 of 2012section 26 (as amended)
  • Magistrates' Court Act, 2015sections 9 and 25
  • Civil Procedure Actsections 1A, 1B and 3A
On appeal from
Principal Magistrate's Court
Case No. 10 of 2014 (Veronica Cherono v Joseph Ruto Cherono)
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2)(b) and 169 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010; Environment and Land Court Act No. 12 of 2012

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Veronicah R. Cherono v Joseph Ruto Cherono [2016] KEELC 999 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Application dated 5.6.2015 (Eldoret Environment and Land Court). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2016/999/eng@2016-01-29

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.