Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck OutPetition (Kisii ELC) – Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 6th December 2019· [2020] KEELC 675 (KLR)

Nelson Machoka Keraro (Suing as the administrator of the estate of Kenyanya Keraro) v Abel Ontweka Kiage (Administrator of the estate of Yuvenalis Kiage Omwega (Deceased) & 4 others [2020] KEELC 675 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
13 October 2020
2,285 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court in Kisii struck out a land petition that was simply an attempt to revive a time-barred claim through the Constitution.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Petitioner, suing as administrator of the estate of Kenyanya Keraro (deceased), registered owner of parcel MAJOGE/KANYIMBO/1010, alleged that the parcel was unlawfully transferred to Peter Okemwa, sub-divided into parcels 1390 and 1391, and sold to the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents in collusion with the 4th Defendant. He sought a declaration of constitutional protection and cancellation of the new titles, invoking Articles 21(1), 22(1) and 40(3) of the Constitution. The 1st Respondent filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection raising res judicata, limitation, want of locus standi (the ad litem grant having been revoked), and abuse of process. The court, defining a preliminary objection per Mukisa Biscuit, framed four issues: res judicata, locus standi, limitation, and whether the Petition was misconceived and ought to be struck out. It found the Petitioner had previously sued over the same subject matter in Kisii ELC Case No. 188 of 2017, which was struck out as statute-barred on 31st May 2019 and never appealed. Framing the same claim as a constitutional petition was held to be an attempt to circumvent the Limitation of Actions Act and evade res judicata; per Damian Belafonte, constitutional relief is an abuse of process where a parallel statutory remedy exists. Further, the Petitioner's ad litem grant was revoked on 30th January 2020, depriving him of locus standi. The Petition was struck out with costs to the 1st Respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Res judicata

Holding

The Petition is res judicata; the same subject matter between the same parties had been determined in Kisii ELC Case No. 188 of 2017, which was struck out as statute-barred on 31st May 2019.

Reasoning

The Petitioner had previously filed a plaint over the same parcel and sought the same cancellation of titles in Kisii ELC Case No. 188 of 2017. That suit was struck out as statute-barred and was never appealed, so the decision stands. Framing the same grievance as a constitutional petition amounts to evading the doctrine of res judicata by introducing a new cause of action to seek the same remedy.

p. 4
02

Abuse of process via constitutional petition

Holding

Invoking constitutional relief where an adequate statutory/parallel remedy exists is an abuse of court process.

Reasoning

Applying Damian Belafonte v Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago, constitutional relief should not be sought where a parallel remedy exists unless there is a feature making the ordinary remedy inadequate. The Petitioner's claim was capable of being determined by way of plaint, as he himself demonstrated by filing ELC Case No. 188 of 2017; the petition was merely an attempt to circumvent limitation.

p. 4
03

Locus standi

Holding

The Petitioner lacked locus standi as his Ad Litem Grant in Kisii CM Succession Cause No. 101 of 2017 was revoked on 30th January 2020.

Reasoning

The 1st Respondent demonstrated that the ad litem grant relied upon by the Petitioner to sue as administrator had been revoked. Without a valid grant the Petitioner had no capacity to institute or maintain the suit on behalf of the deceased's estate, which independently rendered the Petition incompetent.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a claim can be redressed within an existing legislative framework, a party must pursue that framework rather than a constitutional petition, unless the framework provides no efficacious remedy.
  • A suit struck out as statute-barred cannot be revived as a constitutional petition to circumvent the Limitation of Actions Act.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Petition is struck out
  2. 2.Costs to the 1st Respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya 2010Articles 21(1), 22(1), 40(3)
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 7
  • Limitation of Actions ActSection 7 (Cap 22)

Cases cited (7)

  • Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Company Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd
    1969 EA 696
  • Charles Mwangi Ringuru v Nancy Wangare Mathenge
    (2014) eKLR
  • Peter Nyamai & 7 Others v M. J. Clarke Limited
    [2013] eKLR
  • Edwin Thuo v Attorney General and Anor
    Petition No. 212 of 2012
  • Isaac Ngugi v Nairobi Hospital & Another
    [2013] eKLR
  • Rich Productions Ltd v Kenya Pipeline Ltd & Public Procurement Oversight Authority
    [2014] eKLR
  • Damian Belafonte v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago
    C.A No. 84 of 2004
Jurisdiction invoked
Articles 21(1), 22(1) and 40(3) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 (as invoked by the Petitioner)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Nelson Machoka Keraro (Suing as the administrator of the estate of Kenyanya Keraro) v Abel Ontweka Kiage (Administrator of the estate of Yuvenalis Kiage Omwega (Deceased) & 4 others [2020] KEELC 675 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Petition (Kisii ELC) – Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 6th December 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/675/eng@2020-10-13

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