Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment· [2021] KEELC 541 (KLR)

Endonyo Kete Kuto Group Ranch & another v Kamongo Farmers Cooperative Society & another [2021] KEELC 541 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
8 December 2021
CMC.G. Mbogo
2,663 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Narok court allowed two parties with direct land claims to join an ongoing case, but deferred deciding who pays legal costs until the main dispute ends.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Two applications for joinder as interested parties were brought before the Environment and Land Court at Narok: one by Chamoon Konini Ole Mapelu dated 22nd March 2021 and one by Chemokter Gaa Co. Ltd dated 6th April 2021. Both applicants claimed direct interests in parcels arising from the subdivision of Cis Mara/Ololulunga/132, which was subject of restraining orders in the pending suit. The applicants said they only recently learnt of the suit from the Narok Land Registrar and had never been served. The plaintiff opposed, contending the applications were an attempt to revive a dismissed suit (ELC Cause No. 428 of 2017), that the applicants' interest was superficial, and that joinder would delay finalization. The defendant did not oppose. Framing two issues - whether the applicants should be joined and whether the applications were merited - the court applied Order 1 Rule 10(2) and the joinder test in Shirvling Supermarket, Civicon and Andy Forwarders. It found the applicants had a direct interest in the suit parcels and that their presence was necessary to completely settle all questions and prevent proliferated litigation, with no prejudice to existing parties. The court allowed both applications, joining the applicants as defendants (rather than interested parties as sought), permitted amendment of pleadings, and ordered that costs of the applications abide the outcome of the substantive suit.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Applicants should be joined as Interested Parties

Holding

The Applicants have a direct interest over the suit parcels and their joinder will assist the court to completely settle all questions and prevent proliferated litigation without prejudice to the other parties

Reasoning

The court applied Order 1 Rule 10(2) and the test in Shirvling Supermarket and Civicon. It found the Applicants claim direct interest in the suit parcels; their joinder would enable complete adjudication and avoid multiple suits. No prejudice would befall existing parties since they would have opportunity to respond to the Applicants' case at trial.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The test for joinder is whether the applicant has an identifiable interest in the subject matter or is a necessary party for complete adjudication

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The two applications dated 22nd March 2021 and 6th April 2021 are allowed
  2. 2.The two applicants shall join the suit as defendants
  3. 3.Parties are at liberty to amend their pleadings
  4. 4.Costs of the two applications shall abide the outcome of the substantive suit

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A, 1B and 3A
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 51 Rule 1
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 1 Rule 10(2)

Cases cited (4)

  • Moses Wachira vs Niels Bruel & 2 Others
    [2015]eKLR
  • Shirvling Supermarket Limited v Jimmy Ondicho Nyabuti & 2 others
    [2018]eKLR
  • Civicon Limited v Kivuwatt Limited & 2 others
    [2015]eKLR
  • Andy Forwarders Services Limited & another v Price - Waterhouse Coopers limited & another
    [2012]eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 51 Rule 1 and Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010; Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Endonyo Kete Kuto Group Ranch & another v Kamongo Farmers Cooperative Society & another [2021] KEELC 541 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/541/eng@2021-12-08

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