Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in judgment· [2017] KEELC 2429 (KLR)

Moses Saningo Naiguran v Geoffrey Makana Asanyo [2017] KEELC 2429 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
13 July 2017
745 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The High Court dismissed a late attempt to amend a land case, confirming co-administrators need only give consent—not join as parties—and the Land Registrar cannot be sued.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff/applicant, Moses Saningo Naiguran, filed an application on 5th May 2017 under Order 1 Rule 6 and Order 8 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act seeking a stay of further proceedings, leave to amend his plaint, and an order that the annexed amended plaint be deemed duly filed. He sought to enjoin the other co-administrators of the estate of the late John Lemutai Naiguran and the Land Registrar, Trans-Mara, alleging that the respondent had transferred the suit land to himself despite a consent to the contrary, and that the Registrar had perpetuated this illegality. The respondent opposed through a replying affidavit filed 11th May 2017, contending the application was based on falsehoods, was brought in bad faith to delay a suit already set down for hearing, and that the Land Registrar is not a legal entity capable of being sued under the Government Proceedings Act. The court, Mohamed N. Kullow J, dismissed the application. It held the applicant had earlier been given an opportunity to amend but declined, and a late amendment application made after pleadings closed was designed to delay the case. On joinder, the court found no legal requirement to join all co-administrators; only their consent was required. On the Land Registrar, it held that wrongs by government officers acting officially are litigated against the Attorney General, and that a Land Registrar is not a legal entity capable of being sued. The application was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Discretion to grant amendment and stay of proceedings

Holding

Amendment refused where the applicant had already been given an opportunity to amend and filed the application only after pleadings closed and the suit was set down for hearing.

Reasoning

The court held that the applicant was earlier granted the chance to amend his pleading but elected not to. Bringing a late amendment application at the hearing stage serves only to delay the expeditious disposal of the suit, so the discretion under Order 8 rule 3 was not warranted.

p. 2
02

Joinder of co-administrators

Holding

Co-administrators of a deceased's estate need not all be joined as parties; consent suffices.

Reasoning

The court stated there is no legal requirement compelling joinder of all administrators. The only requirement is obtaining the consent of the other administrator(s) where more than one exists, and obtaining consent does not entail making them parties.

p. 2
03

Suing the Land Registrar

Holding

The Land Registrar cannot be sued as a legal entity; claims against government officers acting officially lie against the Attorney General under the Government Proceedings Act.

Reasoning

The court reasoned that the Government Proceedings Act (Chapter 40) regulates proceedings against the state and state officers acting in official conduct. Since the alleged illegality was perpetuated by the Land Registrar acting officially, the proper party is the Attorney General, and the Registrar himself is not suable.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where there is more than one administrator, the consent of the other administrator(s) must be sought, but co-administrators need not be joined as parties to the suit.
  • Where a government officer acting in official capacity commits a wrong, the Attorney General ought to be sued, not the officer.
  • A Land Registrar is not a legal entity capable of being sued.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Application dated 5th May, 2017 dismissed with no order as to costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 1 Rule 6
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 8 Rule 3
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 3A
  • Government Proceedings ActChapter 40 Laws of Kenya
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 1 Rule 6 and Order 8 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Moses Saningo Naiguran v Geoffrey Makana Asanyo [2017] KEELC 2429 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/2429/eng@2017-07-13

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