Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in judgment (Notice of Motion dated 21st September 2018 seeking transfer of Marimanti Civil Case Number 22 of 2018)· [2018] KEELC 1869 (KLR)

Danson Njogu Kibicho v Karigi Muchui & 4 others [2018] KEELC 1869 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
25 September 2018
PNP. M. Njoroge
1,183 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

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court refused to move a 14-year-old land case, ruling that convenience and vague safety fears cannot outweigh a local court's jurisdiction.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff, Danson Njogu Kibicho, filed a Notice of Motion dated 21st September 2018 seeking transfer of Marimanti Civil Case Number 22 of 2018 to the Environment and Land Court at Chuka or Meru, supported by a certificate of urgency and his affidavit. The suit land measured approximately 16.5 HA (41.25 acres); the applicant, resident in Nairobi and in ill health, argued Marimanti was too far, that he feared for his life as the defendants' home area was 'volatile', and that the 14-year-old suit deserved expeditious hearing. The case had previously been shuttled between Embu High Court, Kerugoya ELC, Embu ELC, Chuka ELC and finally Marimanti. Counsel and the interested party were in court but, the application being ex parte, were not heard. In a summary ruling, P.M. Njoroge J dismissed the application. The court held that Marimanti's jurisdiction was undisputed and paramount; the applicant's distance complaint was 'a non-issue'; his safety fears rested on unsubstantiated, tribal-type profiling of local residents, deserving deprecation, and were a matter for the police; and the 14-year delay made it compelling that the scheduled mention at Marimanti on 4th October 2018 proceed so the suit could be heard without further delay. The application was summarily dismissed with no order as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the applicant's grounds warranted transfer of the suit from Marimanti Law Courts

Holding

The application was dismissed; none of the grounds (distance, fear for life, age of suit) justified transfer since Marimanti's jurisdiction was undisputed and the suit should proceed to hearing there without delay

Reasoning

The court found the Marimanti court's jurisdiction unchallenged, making transfer unnecessary. The applicant's inconvenience of distance from Nairobi was irrelevant. His fear of violence was an unsubstantiated and improperly framed complaint amounting to profiling of local residents, better addressed by a report to the police. Since the suit had lingered 14 years since 2004, moving it again would further delay justice; the constitutional right to a speedy hearing was best vindicated by proceeding with the scheduled mention at Marimanti.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Convenience of residence of a litigant is not a ground for transferring a suit from a court of competent jurisdiction; what matters is that court's jurisdiction
  • Alleged generalized, unsubstantiated profiling of the inhabitants of a locality is deprecated and cannot found an application to transfer a suit
  • Alleged threat to personal safety at the seat of a court is a matter for the police, not a ground for transfer
  • The age of a suit (14 years) is a compelling reason for it to proceed to hearing where filed rather than be transferred

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 21st September 2018 was summarily dismissed
  2. 2.No order as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent jurisdiction of the High Court/Environment and Land Court to transfer suits between courts of competent jurisdiction (no statutory provision expressly cited in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Danson Njogu Kibicho v Karigi Muchui & 4 others [2018] KEELC 1869 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in judgment (Notice of Motion dated 21st September 2018 seeking transfer of Marimanti Civil Case Number 22 of 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/1869/eng@2018-09-25

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