Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck OutKisumu ELC Petition No. 5 of 2016 (Notice of Motion dated 28th September 2016)· [2018] KEELC 4209 (KLR)

Juliana Akumba (Suing on behalf of trustees of Franciscan Association of Kenya) v Official Liquidator of Cent Sacco Society (In Liquidation on Behalf of the Commissioner for Co-operative Society Developmen)t & another [2018] KEELC 4209 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
7 March 2018
1,445 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court in Kisumu struck out a land dispute petition as an abuse of court process because the same issues had already been decided in earlier Kenyan cases.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Petitioner, Juliana Akumba, suing on behalf of the Trustees of the Franciscan Association of Kenya, sought conservatory orders restraining Micro Enterprises Support Programme Trust (MESPT), by itself or its agents, from selling, alienating or dealing with land parcel East/Kisumu/Dago/515 pending determination of the petition. The Respondent, the Official Liquidator of Cent Sacco Society (In Liquidation), did not file submissions, while the Interested Party opposed the application through a replying affidavit of Raphael Kuria. The court framed two issues: whether the Petitioner had established a case with a probability of success warranting conservatory orders, and costs. Examining the record, the court found that the suit properties had been the subject of Kisumu HCCC No.8 of 2011, still pending, and Kisumu ELC No.10 of 2015, where an injunction application was on 19th April 2016 dismissed as res judicata and the suit struck out as sub judice and an abuse of process, with the parties directed to pursue the earlier suit. Instead, the Petitioners in this petition and in Kisumu ELC Petition No.6 of 2016, both filed on 28th September 2016, initiated fresh proceedings without disclosing the previous suits and orders. The court held that changing the persons initiating proceedings to stop a statutory power of sale did not exempt the matter from Sections 6 and 7 of the Civil Procedure Act, that no evidence showed any infringement of constitutional rights, and that the application was res judicata. Both the notice of motion and the petition were struck out with costs to the Interested Party.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the conservatory order application is res judicata

Holding

Yes - the question of an injunction over the same suit properties between the same parties was already decided, rendering the current application res judicata

Reasoning

The suit properties East/Kisumu/Dago/515 and 516 were the subject of Kisumu ELC No.10 of 2015 and Kisumu HCCC No.8 of 2011 between the same parties. In its ruling of 19th April 2016 the court dismissed the injunction application as res judicata and struck out the suit as sub judice and an abuse of process. Conservatory orders serve the same purpose as temporary injunctions, so the issue had already been dealt with and the fresh application could not be entertained.

p. 3
02

Whether the petition is an abuse of the court's process

Holding

Yes - the petitioners initiated new proceedings without disclosing the existence of previous suits and orders despite having been directed to pursue the earlier pending suit

Reasoning

The court in its 19th April 2016 ruling had indicated the petitioners were at liberty to pursue their claim in the still-pending Kisumu HCCC No.8 of 2011. Instead, they filed fresh petitions on 28th September 2016 without disclosing the prior suits and orders. Such non-disclosure, by parties who could not claim ignorance of the previous cases, constituted an abuse of process contrary to Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Section 3 of the Environment and Land Court Act.

p. 2
03

Whether the Petitioner demonstrated that constitutional rights would be infringed absent the conservatory order

Holding

No - no evidence was adduced showing how the Petitioner's constitutional rights would be infringed if the order was not granted

Reasoning

The court found no affidavit evidence demonstrating any infringement of the Petitioner's constitutional rights if the conservatory order was withheld. Since conservatory orders serve the same function as temporary injunctions, the court treated the question as already decided in the earlier litigation over the same subject matter.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A change in the person or persons initiating proceedings against a party, with the aim of stopping exercise of a statutory power of sale, does not exempt the proceedings from Sections 6 and 7 of the Civil Procedure Act (sub judice and res judicata).
  • Filing fresh proceedings over a subject matter already before the court, without disclosing previous suits and orders, is an abuse of the court's process.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated 28th September 2016 is declared res judicata in view of the earlier rulings in Kisumu HCCC No. 8 of 2011 and that of 19th April 2016 in Kisumu ELC No. 10 of 2015, and is struck out with costs to the Interested Party.
  2. 2.The petition is declared an abuse of the court's process in view of the court's ruling of 19th April 2016 in Kisumu ELC No. 10 of 2015 and is struck out with costs to the Interested Party.
Jurisdiction invoked
Articles 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Section 3 of the Environment and Land Court Act No. 19 of 2011 (as invoked by the court in striking out the abuse of process); petition filed under the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Juliana Akumba (Suing on behalf of trustees of Franciscan Association of Kenya) v Official Liquidator of Cent Sacco Society (In Liquidation on Behalf of the Commissioner for Co-operative Society Developmen)t & another [2018] KEELC 4209 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Kisumu ELC Petition No. 5 of 2016 (Notice of Motion dated 28th September 2016). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/4209/eng@2018-03-07

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