Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck Out· [2019] KEELC 4019 (KLR)

Elijah Chepkwony Chirchir v Joel Kipngeno Rop & 5 others [2019] KEELC 4019 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
14 March 2019
1,284 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

#

A Kenyan court struck out an eviction suit because the administrator used the wrong type of limited grant, meaning he had no legal right to sue.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Kericho (J.M Onyango, J) determines a preliminary objection dated 7th February 2019 filed by the Defendants in a suit in which the Plaintiff, describing himself as the legal administrator of the estate of Kipchirchir Arap Maina (Deceased), sought an eviction order against the Defendants in respect of L.R No. Kericho/Kabartegan/438. The Defendants argued that the suit was fatally defective because it was brought by a person without capacity to act for the estate, contrary to section 82 of the Law of Succession Act, and was an abuse of process. The Plaintiff responded that he had obtained a Limited Grant of Letters of Administration Ad Litem on 21st September 2017 before filing suit. The court framed two issues: whether the suit offended section 82 of the Act, and if so, whether it should be struck out. Restating the Mukhisa Biscuits definition of a preliminary objection as a pure point of law, the court distinguished between limited grants ad colligenda bona defuncti under section 67(1) and Rule 36(1) of the Probate and Administration Rules, which serve only to collect and preserve a deceased's assets, and grants limited for purposes of filing suit under section 54 read with rule 14 of the 5th Schedule to the Act. It held that the Plaintiff had obtained the wrong limited grant, which deprived him of locus standi, a point of law that cannot be dismissed as a technicality, citing Alfred Njau v City Council of Nairobi. The court found merit in the preliminary objection, struck out the Plaintiff's suit and awarded costs to the Defendant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a limited grant ad colligenda bona defuncti confers capacity to institute a suit on behalf of a deceased's estate

Holding

No. It is a grant for collection and preservation of assets only; filing suit requires a limited grant under Section 54 read with Form 14 of the 5th Schedule to the Law of Succession Act.

Reasoning

The court distinguished the two types of limited grants under the Law of Succession Act. Section 67(1) read with Rule 36(1) of the Probate and Administration Rules governs grants ad colligenda bona defuncti, which are strictly for collecting and preserving the deceased's assets. Section 54 read with rule 14 of the 5th Schedule provides for administration limited to a suit. Relying on the wrong grant deprives a plaintiff of locus standi.

p. 2
02

Whether a preliminary objection on locus standi is a technicality that can be disregarded

Holding

No. Locus standi is a pure point of law and cannot be wished away as a technicality.

Reasoning

Applying the Mukhisa Biscuits definition of a preliminary objection as a pure point of law argued on the assumption that all facts pleaded by the other side are correct, the court held that lack of capacity to sue is such a point. Citing Alfred Njau v City Council of Nairobi, it held that a party without locus standi cannot be heard, even on whether he has a case worth listening to.

p. 2
03

Whether the suit should be struck out on the preliminary objection

Holding

Yes. Having found the preliminary objection merited, the court struck out the suit with costs to the Defendant.

Reasoning

Because the Plaintiff had no capacity to sue on behalf of the estate of Kipchirchir Arap Maina (Deceased), the suit was fatally defective. The court found merit in the preliminary objection dated 7th February 2019 and struck out the Plaint with costs to the Defendant.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A limited grant ad colligenda bona defuncti is for collecting and preserving the estate of the deceased and cannot be used to institute a suit; only a limited grant under Section 54 read with Form 14 of the 5th Schedule to the Law of Succession Act confers locus standi to sue on behalf of a deceased's estate
  • Locus standi is a point of law and not a technicality that can be disregarded
  • A party without locus standi cannot be heard at all

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Plaintiff's suit is struck out
  2. 2.Costs of the suit awarded to the Defendant

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Law of Succession ActSection 82
  • Law of Succession ActSection 67(1)
  • Law of Succession ActSection 54
  • Law of Succession Act5th Schedule, rule 14
  • Probate and Administration RulesRule 36(1)

Cases cited (4)

  • Mukhisa Biscuits Company Limited vs Westend Distributors Ltd
    [1969] EA 696
  • In Re Matter of the Estate of Morarji Bhanji Dhanak (Deceased)
    (2000) eKLR
  • Alfred Njau & Others v City Council of Nairobi
    (1982-88) 1 KAR 229
  • Beatrice Wambui Kiarie v Beatrice Wambui Kiarie & 9 Others
    (2018) eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court under Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution (suit concerning land title L.R No. Kericho/Kabartegan/438)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Elijah Chepkwony Chirchir v Joel Kipngeno Rop & 5 others [2019] KEELC 4019 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/4019/eng@2019-03-14

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