Paul Nderi Warui & 24 others v Chrysogon Wang’ondu Nduhiu & 3 others [2021] [2021] KEELC 927 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed it can hear disputes over company-owned land, rejecting an argument that such claims belong to the High Court.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction of the ELC over claims involving company-owned land
The suit falls within Section 13(2)(e) of the Environment and Land Court Act as a dispute relating to land, notwithstanding the corporate ownership of the properties
The plaintiffs seek a declaration that the sale and transfer of suit properties was illegal and cancellation of the 3rd Defendant's title. Though the properties were initially owned by a company, the claim concerns fraudulent alienation of land. Companies are capable of holding land which can be the subject of legal disputes, so the claim is not converted into a commercial dispute merely by the corporate veil.
Derivative action argument under Sections 238 and 239 of the Companies Act
Rejected; the claim was characterised as one based on fraudulent dealings with land, within ELC jurisdiction
The Defendants contended the claim was a derivative action for breach of directors' duties reserved for the High Court. The court held that the reliefs sought - cancellation of titles and transfer of land - can only be granted by the Environment and Land Court, and the commercial characterisation did not oust the court's jurisdiction under Article 162(2)(b).
Whether the objections constituted valid preliminary objections
The Plaintiffs argued the objections were not pure points of law, but the court disposed of them on the merits of jurisdiction
The Plaintiffs submitted that factual matters would need to be established before the objections could be adjudicated. The court nonetheless determined the jurisdictional question on the law, finding the objection not well founded and overruling it entirely.
Legal principles established
#- A company may hold land, and a dispute seeking cancellation of title to land fraudulently alienated by directors falls within the ELC's jurisdiction even where the properties were initially owned by a company
Court orders
#- 1.The Defendants' notice of preliminary objection dated 17th May, 2021 is overruled in its entirety
- 2.Costs shall be in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution read with Section 13(2) of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2011
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (3)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Mhasibu Bustani Management Company v Mhasibu Housing Company Limited (Environment and Land Case E058 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 192 (KLR)[2026] KEELC 192 (KLR)26 Jan 2026applied
- Muumbo & another (C/o Muigai Kemei & Associates Advocates) v Mwingi View Point Lodge Limited & 8 others (Environment & Land Case 10 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 6921 (KLR)[2024] KEELC 6921 (KLR)22 Oct 2024applied
- Kiptoo alias Barnge’tuny Kiptoo & 3 others v Rono & 4 others (Environment & Land Case E024 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 4048 (KLR)[2024] KEELC 4048 (KLR)29 Apr 2024followed
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Paul Nderi Warui & 24 others v Chrysogon Wang’ondu Nduhiu & 3 others [2021] [2021] KEELC 927 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). ELC Case No. 4 of 2021 (Othaya). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/927/eng@2021-11-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.