Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOther· [2019] KEELC 2607 (KLR)

Mary Enole Nkolia & 2 others (Suing in their capacity as personal rep. of Parmuat Ole Togam deceased) v Allan Musanka Togom & 2 others [2019] KEELC 2607 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
4 July 2019
775 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

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court cannot decide disputes over a deceased person's estate; such cases must go to the High Court Family Division.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Plaintiff sued by plaint dated 12th March 2019 seeking inhibition against transfer of or dealings in LR NO. CIS MARA/ILMASHARIANI/MORIJO/408, said to form the estate of Parmuat Ole Togom, a declaration that its transfer without confirmation of the grant of letters of administration was null and void, and rectification of the register to delete the name of Allan Musanka Togom and restore that of the deceased. The 1st Defendant raised a preliminary objection contending that the court lacked jurisdiction since the matter touched on a deceased's estate and the issuance of grants, which lies with the High Court Family Division; he further contended that the interim orders of March 2019 were final in nature and ultra vires ab-initio, that he was the duly registered owner allocated the land by Ilmashariani Group Ranch, and that there was non-joinder of the Group Ranch officials. The judge isolated the purely legal grounds, declining to determine the objections on cause of action and misjoinder as issues of fact. Applying Article 162(2) of the Constitution, the court held that since the central issue at trial would be the deceased's estate, governed by the Law of Succession Act, the ELC lacked jurisdiction and transferred the suit to the High Court Family Division. Agreeing that order No. 3 of the interim orders appeared final and could not be granted at the interlocutory stage, the court vacated those orders and directed each party to bear the costs of the application. Judgment delivered at Narok on 4th July 2019 by Mohammed Noor Kullow, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Environment and Land Court has jurisdiction over a dispute centred on a deceased person's estate

Holding

The court lacks jurisdiction because the central issue is the estate of the deceased, governed by the Law of Succession Act, which vests jurisdiction in the High Court Family Division; the suit is transferred there.

Reasoning

The suit land, though within the local jurisdiction of the ELC and registered in the 1st Defendant's name, is claimed by the Plaintiff as part of the estate of the late Paramuat Ole Togom. The court held that the estate question would be the central issue at trial, and that such matters fall under the Law of Succession Act, reserved for the High Court Family Division, not the ELC whose mandate under Article 162(2) is environment and use, occupation and title to land.

p. 2
02

Whether the interim orders granted on 12th/13th March 2019 were sustainable

Holding

Order No. 3 appeared to be a final order which could not be granted at the interlocutory stage; the orders were vacated.

Reasoning

The 1st Defendant contended the orders were extreme, harsh and final at the interim stage and hence ultra vires ab-initio. The judge, on perusing the orders, agreed that order No. 3 was framed in terms of final orders that could not be granted at the interlocutory stage and therefore vacated them, while reserving the remaining preliminary objection grounds as issues of fact.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The Environment and Land Court's jurisdiction under Article 162(2) covers disputes relating to environment and the use, occupation and title to land, but not the administration of a deceased person's estate, which falls to the High Court Family Division under the Law of Succession Act.
  • Interim orders that are final in effect cannot properly be granted at the interlocutory stage.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Transfer of the suit to the High Court's Family Division for want of jurisdiction
  2. 2.Vacation of the orders issued on 12th/13th March, 2019, particularly order No. 3 which appeared final at the interlocutory stage
  3. 3.Each party to bear the cost of the application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 162(2)
  • Law of Succession Act
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2) of the Constitution of Kenya

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (1)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mary Enole Nkolia & 2 others (Suing in their capacity as personal rep. of Parmuat Ole Togam deceased) v Allan Musanka Togom & 2 others [2019] KEELC 2607 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/2607/eng@2019-07-04

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