Market Plaza Limited v City Council of Nairobi & another [2020] KEELC 1671 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's High Court allowed the anti-corruption commission and City Market traders' association to join a land dispute, shaping who can be added to Kenyan property suits.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the EACC (KACC) was a necessary and proper party to the suit
Yes. The EACC, having a statutory mandate to investigate the loss of public property and having conducted investigations into the alienation of the suit property, was a necessary party whose presence would obviate a separate suit.
The EACC was established under the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act with the mandate to investigate the loss of or damage to public property and to institute recovery proceedings. It had undertaken investigations into the alienation of the suit property and found the alienation to be unlawful. Its joinder would enable the court to completely and effectually determine all questions and avoid multiplicity of suits. The plaintiff's objection that joinder would introduce a new cause of action was rejected since the lawfulness of the plaintiff's acquisition was already an issue.
Whether the City Market Stall Holders Association had a direct interest warranting joinder
Yes. The association's members were traders at the City Market, and the suit property was reserved for public use as parking and market expansion; the 1st defendant, having alienated the property, could not be fully trusted to protect their interests.
The association's members were undisputed traders at the City Market and tenants of the 1st defendant. The suit property had been carved out of land set aside for the market. The association contended that the alienation would affect the interests of its members and that the 1st defendant, being the alienator, could not protect them. The court found this contention not far-fetched and held that the association had laid a proper basis for joinder, noting its prior participation in the judicial review proceedings without objection.
Whether the joinder applications were res judicata or introduced a new cause of action
No. The plaintiff did not demonstrate that the issue of ownership had been conclusively determined in a prior suit between the parties, and the validity of the plaintiff's title was already in issue via the 1st defendant's counterclaim.
The plaintiff argued that ownership had been determined in HCCC No. 72 of 1994 and that joinder would introduce a new cause of action. The court found no evidence that the ownership issue had been raised, heard and conclusively determined between the parties. The lawfulness of the plaintiff's acquisition was already raised by the 1st defendant, so joinder would not introduce a new cause of action.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant seeking joinder as a defendant must demonstrate a direct and subsisting interest in the litigation and that a relief flows from that defendant to the plaintiff.
- A person qualifies to be joined as a necessary party where the orders sought would legally affect that person's interest, or where a defendant cannot effectually set up a defence without that person being joined.
Court orders
#- 1.The application by Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission dated 2nd April, 2008 is allowed in terms of prayers (ii) and (iii) thereof
- 2.Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (now Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission) is added to the suit as the 3rd defendant
- 3.The application by City Market Stall Holders Association dated 15th November, 2010 is allowed
- 4.City Market Stall Holders Association is added to the suit as the 4th defendant through its Chairman, Vice-Chairlady/man and Patron
- 5.The plaintiff shall amend the plaint within 21 days to effect the joinder of the 3rd and 4th defendants
- 6.The 3rd and 4th defendants shall file their pleadings, witness statements and indexed and paginated bundle of documents within 21 days from the date of service of the amended plaint
- 7.The costs of the two applications shall be in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction and Order 1 Rules 3 and 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules (Cap 21, Sub-Legislation)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Market Plaza Limited v City Council of Nairobi & another [2020] KEELC 1671 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). HCCC No. 1756 of 2000 (O.S.). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/1671/eng@2020-07-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.