John Lemiso Ole Lekakeny v David Kipkurui Kandie [2020] KEELC 3441 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan landowner's trust claim survived early dismissal attempts, and status quo orders now protect the property pending full trial.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the suit founded on a 2010 sale agreement is time barred under Section 4(1)(a) of the Limitation of Actions Act
The preliminary objection was dismissed because when the cause of action accrued is a factual question unfit for determination at a preliminary stage
The plaintiff pleaded trust and asserted the cause of action accrued on 15th February 2019 upon judgment in Mombasa ELC Case No. 22 of 2012, while the defendant contended limitation ran from execution of the agreement on 7th January 2010. The court held the parties are at variance on when the cause of action arose, that this is a matter of fact to be proved at trial, and that investigating it would convert the objection into a mini-trial, disqualifying it as a preliminary objection.
Whether the plaintiff's suit should be struck out as frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process
The defendant's striking-out motion was dismissed as the plaint raises triable issues
Applying Hatimy, Yaya Limited and D.T. Dobie, the court reiterated that a plaintiff is entitled to pursue a claim however improbable its chances unless the defendant demonstrates shortly and conclusively that it is bound to fail. The plaint pleads that the defendant holds the property in trust, paid only Kshs.300,000 of the purchase price, and seeks declarations and revocation of the lease and sale agreement, raising triable issues deserving a full trial.
Whether the plaintiff satisfied the principles for a temporary injunction
The plaintiff's motion dated 1st July 2019 was allowed in terms of prayer (c), maintaining the status quo
The court applied Giella v Cassman Brown and Mrao Ltd v First American Bank, and adopted Suleiman v Amboseli Resort to hold the court may consider the overriding objective and choose the lower risk of injustice. Since the plaintiff's concern was alienation or disposal of the suit property, orders safeguarding and maintaining the status quo until the suit was determined were fair and appropriate.
Legal principles established
#- A preliminary objection that requires investigation of facts is not a pure point of law and must fail
- Striking out pleadings is discretionary and should be exercised sparingly, only in the clearest of cases
- At the interlocutory stage the court may go beyond the Giella principles and opt for the lower risk of injustice by maintaining the status quo
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 1st July 2019 is allowed in terms of prayers (c) thereof
- 2.The notice of motion dated 23rd August 2019 is dismissed
- 3.The preliminary objection dated 23rd August 2019 is dismissed
- 4.Each party to bear his own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court (not expressly cited in the judgment)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "John Lemiso Ole Lekakeny v David Kipkurui Kandie [2020] KEELC 3441 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/3441/eng@2020-01-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.