Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in the judgment· [2019] KEELC 4721 (KLR)

Sunrise Orthopaedic & Trauma Hospital Ltd & another v Lectary Kibor Keiyo Lelei & 2 others [2019] KEELC 4721 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
1 February 2019
AOA. Ombwayo
1,646 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The 2nd defendant's application dated 14.12.2018 sought the striking out of the further amended plaint dated 4.12.2018 as an abuse of the court's process, and alternatively the transfer of the suit to the High Court at Eldoret, on the ground that the amendments had changed the suit from a land dispute into a commercial one outside the ELC's jurisdiction under section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act. The 1st defendant filed a preliminary objection raising the same jurisdictional objection and adding that the new prayers were time barred under the Limitation of Actions Act and that the amendments had converted a derivative claim into a direct claim. The plaintiff countered that the pleadings remained anchored on title to the suit property and on constructive trust. The court framed the first issue as its own jurisdiction. It found the cause of action to be a joint venture agreement to construct and operate a hospital on the suit property, with the suit property to be transferred to the incorporated joint venture company once discharged from a charge. Because the joint venture was a contract revolving on land, and because the claim was also founded on chose in action and constructive trust, the court held that section 13 conferred jurisdiction on the ELC, applying the Owners of the Motor Vessel 'Lillian S' principle. On limitation, the court held the issue had already been decided in its ruling of 3.12.2018 and could not be revisited by virtue of section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act. The application and the preliminary objection were both disallowed, with costs to the plaintiff.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the ELC has jurisdiction over a suit founded on a joint venture agreement relating to land

Holding

The ELC has jurisdiction because the joint venture is a contract revolving on land, and the claim is also based on chose in action and constructive trust

Reasoning

Article 162(2)(b) empowers Parliament to establish the ELC, and section 13 of the ELC Act confers power to determine disputes relating to land and contracts, choses in action or instruments granting enforceable interests in land. Although the venture was commercial (a hospital), the cause of action centres on the transfer of title to the suit property, breaches of constructive or implied trust, and chose in action claims, all of which fall squarely within the court's jurisdiction.

p. 3
02

Whether the limitation issue can be re-litigated

Holding

It cannot; the limitation question was decided in the court's ruling of 3.12.2018 and is res judicata under section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act

Reasoning

Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act bars trying a matter directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties that was heard and finally decided by a competent court. The defendants had the opportunity to contest limitation in the earlier ruling and, according to the plaintiff's counsel, should have appealed rather than raising the issue afresh in the application and preliminary objection.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Jurisdiction is everything; without it a court must down its tools
  • The Environment and Land Court has jurisdiction over disputes relating to public, private and community land and contracts, choses in action or other instruments granting enforceable interests in land
  • An issue already heard and finally decided in a prior ruling cannot be revisited by the same court by dint of res judicata

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 14.12.2018 is disallowed
  2. 2.The preliminary objection dated 14.12.2018 is disallowed
  3. 3.Costs to the plaintiff

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya 2010Article 162(2)(b)
  • Environment & Land Court ActSection 13
  • Limitation of Actions Act, Cap 22, Laws of KenyaSection 4
  • Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21, Laws of KenyaSection 7

Cases cited (1)

  • Owners of the Motor Vessel M.V Lillian S. v. Caltex Oil (K) Limited
    [1989] KLR 1
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Sunrise Orthopaedic & Trauma Hospital Ltd & another v Lectary Kibor Keiyo Lelei & 2 others [2019] KEELC 4721 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/4721/eng@2019-02-01

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