Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherELC Civil Case No. 80 of 2015· [2019] KEELC 1306 (KLR)

Guy Spencer ELMS (Suing as the personal representative of the state of Roger Bryan Robson (Deceased) v Agnes Kariuki Kagure [2019] KEELC 1306 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
18 September 2019
LKL. Komingoi
276 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The court agreed a dispute over the same land was already before the High Court's succession cause, so the application to pause the case gets an urgent hearing.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short directions ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi in ELC Civil Case No. 80 of 2015, delivered by L. Komingoi, J on 18th September 2019. The plaintiff, Guy Spencer Elms, suing as personal representative of the estate of Roger Bryan Robson (deceased), filed a notice of motion dated 10th May 2015 seeking a stay of these proceedings pending the hearing and final determination of High Court Succession Cause No. 955 of 2013 (In the matter of the Estate of Roger Bryan Robson (Deceased)). Mr. Maloba, for the defendant Agnes Kariuki Kagure, objected, arguing that the plaintiff continued to enjoy interim orders and that the subject matter of the suit had been excluded in the confirmation of grant in the succession cause. The court observed that it was not in dispute that the suit premises, LR Nos 2327/10 and 2327/117, were substantially in dispute both in this suit and in the pending succession cause between the estate and the defendant. Rather than granting or refusing the stay at that stage, the court directed that the notice of motion be heard first and ordered the defendant to file a response so that the application could be heard and determined expeditiously. No costs order was made and no authorities were cited. The ruling is procedural and interlocutory in nature; the stay application itself remains to be determined.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether stay proceedings should be ordered pending determination of a succession cause concerning the same subject matter

Holding

The court did not finally determine the stay application at this stage; it gave the application priority for inter partes hearing, directing the defendant to file a response

Reasoning

The judge considered rival submissions of counsel and perused the grounds on the notice of motion. Noting that the suit premises (LR Nos 2327/10 and 2327/117) are substantially in dispute in the pending High Court Succession Cause No. 955 of 2013 between the Estate of Roger Bryan Robson (Deceased) and the defendant, the court considered an expeditious inter partes hearing of the motion the appropriate course rather than granting or refusing the stay ex parte on the papers.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where the subject matter of a suit is substantially in dispute in a pending succession cause, an interlocutory application to stay the suit pending that cause may be given priority for hearing

Court orders

#
  1. 1.That the notice of motion dated 10th May 2015 be heard first
  2. 2.That the defendant is directed to file a response so that the application can be heard and determined expeditiously
Jurisdiction invoked
Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court under Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution (as the court seized of a land dispute; no provision expressly invoked in this directions ruling)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Guy Spencer ELMS (Suing as the personal representative of the state of Roger Bryan Robson (Deceased) v Agnes Kariuki Kagure [2019] KEELC 1306 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). ELC Civil Case No. 80 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/1306/eng@2019-09-18

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