AI-generated case brief

Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke

ELCPartially AllowedNotice of Motion dated 19th April 2017 (Appeal from Business Premises Rent Tribunal Ruling of 10th February 2017)· [2018] KEELC 4501 (KLR)

Intercountries Importers and Exporters Ltd v Total Security Limited & 7 others [2018] KEELC 4501 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya

14 February 2018

EOE. O. OBAGA

594 words in judgment

View original judgment Read on Kenya Law Watch case

AI-assisted case brief

·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

A Kenyan High Court ruled that a judge who already delivered judgment cannot revive a case, and land disputes belong in the Environment and Land Court.

What this practically means

Executive summary

The appellant, Teleposta Pension Scheme Registered Trustees, filed a Notice of Motion dated 19th April 2017 seeking admission of its appeal from a ruling of the Chairman of the Business Premises Rent Tribunal delivered on 10th February 2017, in which Total Security Limited and Lemolok Limited were held to be protected tenants. The appellant additionally sought, by prayer 2, that the appeal be placed before Lady Justice R.E. Ougo, the judge who had decided High Court Civil Suit No. 1400 of 2004, in which ownership of LR No. 209/13238 was found to belong to the appellant. The 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents did not oppose prayers 1, 3 and 4 but opposed prayer 2, contending that the High Court judge was functus officio and, given the Environment and Land Court Act and Gazette Notices issued by the Chief Justice, lacked jurisdiction over environment and land matters. Justice E.O. Obaga agreed, holding that the trial judge was functus officio and had no jurisdiction over land matters, invoking the Court of Appeal's decision in Karisa Chengo & Others v Republic (2015) eKLR, later upheld by the Supreme Court. The court allowed the motion in terms of prayers 1, 3 and 4, but refused prayer 2, limiting oral submissions to highlighting written submissions if necessary, with costs in the cause.

Key legal issues

Whether the Judge who decided HCCC No. 1400 of 2004 could hear the present appeal

Holding

She cannot; she is functus officio and lacks jurisdiction over environment and land matters following Karisa Chengo & Others v Republic as upheld by the Supreme Court

Reasoning

The court found that after delivering judgment the trial Judge is functus officio. Further, following the Environment and Land Court Act and Gazette Notices issued by the Chief Justice, matters concerning environment and land fall outside her jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal in Karisa Chengo dealt with jurisdictional limits of superior courts, and the Supreme Court upheld those findings. The matter is already properly before the Court of Appeal.

p. 2

Legal principles established

A judge is functus officio after delivering judgment and cannot handle related matters outside their allotted jurisdiction

Court orders

1.The Appeal is admitted
2.The Appeal shall be dispensed with by way of written submissions, with oral submissions limited to highlighting written submissions if necessary
3.Costs of the application to be in the cause

Authorities

Legislation

Environment and Land Court Act

Cases cited (1)

Karisa Chengo & Others Vs Republic
(2015) eKLR

On appeal from: Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Jurisdiction invoked: Appellate jurisdiction over appeals from the Business Premises Rent Tribunal

Key timeline

Practical implications

Frequently asked questions

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Intercountries Importers and Exporters Ltd v Total Security Limited & 7 others [2018] KEELC 4501 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Notice of Motion dated 19th April 2017 (Appeal from Business Premises Rent Tribunal Ruling of 10th February 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/4501/eng@2018-02-14

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