Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedELC Suit (Thika) – the judgment does not state the suit number· [2019] KEELC 4087 (KLR)

Mary Waithera Gikima & another v Kariuki Wairagu & 3 others [2019] KEELC 4087 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
18 March 2019
5,132 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~21 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan land buyer who paid KSh 29 million got court protection of his money and title deed after sellers delayed too long in invoking their arbitration clause.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Environment and Land Court at Thika (L. Gacheru, J) determined two Notices of Motion dated 28th February 2018 arising from a dispute over LR No.4953/33/IR 7529/1. The first application, by the 1st-3rd Defendants, sought striking out of the 4th Defendant's Notice of Claim on the basis of an arbitration clause (Clause 15:1 of the Sale Agreement of 15th September 2014) and a stay of the suit pending Kiambu HCCA No.58 of 2017, a succession-related matter concerning who is the proper legal representative of the estate of Njoroge Gikima. The second application, by the 4th Defendant, sought preservation of the Kshs.29,000,000/= purchase consideration and custody of the title deed under the court's inherent powers. The court held that the substratum of the dispute - the proper representation of the estate - falls within the jurisdiction of the Kiambu High Court in a succession cause, and stayed this suit under Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act until Kiambu HCCCA No.58 of 2018 is determined. However, the arbitration prayer failed: the 1st-3rd Defendants had filed a Reply to the 4th Defendant's Cross-claim and did not invoke the arbitration clause timeously, thereby waiving the right under Section 6(1) of the Arbitration Act, guided by Fairlane Supermarket v Barclays Bank and Lofty v Bedouch Enterprises. Finding the vendors' conduct mired with deceit and material non-disclosure - they sold the property while an unupset judgment in Thika CMCC No.1123 of 2000 favoured Miriam Waithera Njoroge - the court allowed the 4th Defendant's application: the consideration is to be deposited in an interest-earning account in the joint names of counsel within 45 days, and the title deed is to be deposited in court pending the Kiambu succession cause. Costs of the dismissed preliminary objection and prayer 1 were awarded to the 4th Defendant; costs of the 4th Defendant's application were made costs in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Stay of proceedings under Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act where the substratum of the suit is pending before the Family/Succession Court

Holding

The suit is stayed pending the hearing and determination of the Kiambu High Court Succession Cause (Kiambu HCCCA No.58 of 2018), as the issue of the proper legal representative of the estate of Njoroge Gikima can only be determined by the High Court in a Succession Cause

Reasoning

The court noted its earlier Ruling of 19th August 2016 identifying the substratum as who is the proper representative of the estate of Njoroge Gikima to inherit the suit property. That issue was pending before the Kiambu High Court in a succession cause. An Environment and Land Court is not seized of jurisdiction over succession matters, and Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act bars trial of a suit where the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted proceeding.

p. 4
02

Waiver of the right to arbitration under Section 6(1) of the Arbitration Act

Holding

The 1st-3rd Defendants waived their right to arbitration by failing to apply at the time of entering appearance or filing pleadings; they filed a Reply to the 4th Defendant's Cross-claim before bringing the application

Reasoning

Section 6(1) of the Arbitration Act requires an application for stay and referral to arbitration not later than the time of entering appearance or filing pleadings. The 4th Defendant filed its Cross-claim on 18th May 2017 and the Defendants thereafter filed a Reply, taking more than 14 days to file the application. Relying on Fairlane Supermarket Ltd v Barclays Bank Ltd and Lofty v Bedouch Enterprises Ltd, the court held the right was waived.

p. 5
03

Preservation of the sale consideration and title deed under the inherent powers (Sections 1A and 3A, Civil Procedure Act)

Holding

The 1st-3rd Defendants are compelled to deposit the Kshs.29,000,000/= consideration in an interest-earning account in the joint names of counsel, and the title deed is to be deposited in court, pending the outcome of the Kiambu succession cause

Reasoning

The 4th Defendant paid Kshs.29,000,000/= as consideration. If the grant issued to the 3rd Defendant is revoked, the sale risks being declared null and void and the title cancelled. The 1st-3rd Defendants sold the property while a valid judgment in Thika CMCC No.1123 of 2000 remained unupset, actions the court found mired with deceit and material non-disclosure. Preservation under Sections 1A and 3A was necessary to prevent the 4th Defendant's potential recovery being rendered nugatory.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a matter in issue in a suit is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted proceeding between the same parties or parties claiming under the same title, the court must stay the suit under Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act
  • A party who does not apply for a reference to arbitration at the time of entering appearance or filing pleadings, and instead takes steps in the proceedings, waives the right to arbitration under Section 6(1) of the Arbitration Act

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The 1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants' Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 19th January 2018 is dismissed, with costs to the 4th Defendant
  2. 2.Prayer No.1 of the 1st-3rd Defendants' Notice of Motion dated 28th February 2018 (referral to arbitration/striking out the 4th Defendant's Notice of Claim) is dismissed, with costs to the 4th Defendant
  3. 3.Prayer No.2 of the 1st-3rd Defendants' Notice of Motion dated 28th February 2018 is allowed - the suit is stayed pending the hearing and determination of Kiambu High Court HCCCA No.58 of 2018
  4. 4.The 4th Defendant's Notice of Motion dated 28th February 2018 is allowed in terms of prayers no.2 and 3, with costs in the cause
  5. 5.The 1st-3rd Defendants are compelled to deposit the monies paid as consideration in an interest-earning account in the joint names of the Advocates for the 4th Defendant and the 1st-3rd Defendants, to be opened forthwith, with the monies deposited within 45 days from the date of the Ruling
  6. 6.The title deed to the suit property held by the 4th Defendant is to be deposited in court and held under lock and key until the final determination of Kiambu High Court HCCCA No.58 of 2018 and/or until further orders of the Court

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51; Order 11 Rule 3(2)(a)
  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A, 1B, 3A, 6 and 63(c)
  • Civil Procedure Code Cap 21 Laws of KenyaSections 1A and 3A
  • Arbitration Act (1995)Section 6(1)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159(2)(b)

Cases cited (2)

  • Fairlane Supermarket Ltd…Vs…Barclays Bank Ltd
    HCCC No.102 of 2011
  • Lofty…Vs…Bedouch Enterprises Ltd
    EALR (2005) 2 EA
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 63(c) of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 51 and Order 11 Rule 3(2)(a) of the Civil Procedure Rules; Sections 1A and 3A of the Civil Procedure Code Cap 21; Environment and Land Court Act jurisdiction

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mary Waithera Gikima & another v Kariuki Wairagu & 3 others [2019] KEELC 4087 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). ELC Suit (Thika) – the judgment does not state the suit number. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/4087/eng@2019-03-18

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