Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNot stated in extract (Constitutional Petition, Environment and Land Court, Mombasa)· [2021] KEELC 2810 (KLR)

County Government of Kilifi &another; v Registrar of Titles & Others [2021] KEELC 2810 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
10 June 2021
3,855 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~15 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court struck out a Mtwapa land petition because the same dispute had already been finally decided, and renaming parties or claims doesn't restart litigation.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Petitioners challenged the amalgamation, subdivision and allocation of Plot Nos. 324 and 334 Section III MN, Mtwapa, Kilifi (part of land north of Mtwapa Creek measuring about 31.29 hectares), contending that the 2nd Petitioner and over 1000 individuals and families had occupied the land for over 35 years and that its allocation from 6th January 1988 without their involvement was unconstitutional and null and void, or alternatively that the land reverted to public land, and seeking implementation of a settlement scheme declaration. The 4th, 5th and other listed Respondents filed a Notice of Motion and Preliminary Objection seeking striking out of the Amended Petition dated 14th July 2020 as res judicata, an abuse of process, and scandalous, frivolous and vexatious, relying on judgments in HCCC No. 732 of 1991, Civil Appeal No. 125 of 1997 and HCCC No. 64 of 2004. The Petitioners argued that their historical-injustice claim founded on Articles 67, 68 and 259 of the Constitution was a new cause of action and that they were not parties to the former suits. The court, applying Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act and Section 28 of the Environment and Land Court Act, held that the same issues over the same plots had been litigated and finally determined on merit, that parties cannot evade res judicata by adding parties or causes of action, and that the Petitioners had camouflaged previously litigated issues. The application and objection were allowed and the Amended Petition was struck out with costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the petition is res judicata

Holding

The petition is res judicata as it raises the same issues over the same plots previously litigated and finally determined in HCCC No. 732 of 1991, Civil Appeal No. 125 of 1997 and HCCC No. 64 of 2004

Reasoning

The court found the subject matter in all suits to be Plot Nos. 324 and 334 Section III Mainland North; judgment in the former suit was entered on merit after parties presented evidence, and the matter went on appeal where the Court of Appeal delivered judgment. Petitioners had merely camouflaged previously litigated issues, possibly adding other parties, which does not evade res judicata.

p. 4
02

Whether adding unnamed parties/occupiers as beneficiaries avoids res judicata

Holding

No; parties cannot evade res judicata by adding other parties or causes of action in a subsequent suit

Reasoning

The petition was brought on behalf of unnamed individuals and families whose interests were said to be represented by the 1st Petitioner. The court held those named individuals may as well be the parties in the former suits, and Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act bars suits between parties or those under whom they claim, litigating under the same title.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • The elements of res judicata are conjunctive rather than disjunctive; all must be present before a suit is deemed res judicata
  • Parties cannot evade the doctrine of res judicata by merely adding other parties or causes of action in a subsequent suit
  • Res judicata extends to every point which properly belonged to the subject of litigation and which parties exercising reasonable diligence might have brought forward

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 15th February 2021 and the Notice of Preliminary Objection are allowed
  2. 2.The Amended Petition dated 14th July 2020 is struck out with costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSection 7
  • Environment and Land Court ActSection 28
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 23(1), 40, 50(1), 67, 68, 165(5), 165(6) and (7), 259
  • Registered Titles Act (now repealed)Chapter 281 Laws of Kenya

Cases cited (15)

  • Kenya Commercial Bank Limited –vs- Benjoh Amalgamated Limited
    [2017] eKLR
  • Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission –vs- Maina Kiai & 5 Others
    [2017] eKLR
  • National Land Commission –vs- Registered Trustee of the Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Eastern Africa & Another
    [2019] eKLR
  • Henderson –vs- Henderson
    [1843] 67 ER 313
  • Mburu Kinyua –vs- Gachini Tutu
    [1978] KLR 69
  • Kennedy Ellam Wekesa (As the representative of Estate of George Ellam Wekesa –vs- Abdulla Taib (As the representative of Estate of Sheikh Ali Taib
    2020 eKLR
  • Bellance Development Company Ltd –vs- Francis Gikonyo & 7 Others
    [2018] eKLR
  • Republic –vs- The National Land Commission and Another Ex parte Muktar Saman Olow
    [2015] eKLR
  • D.T Dobie Company (Kenya) Limited –vs- Joseph Mbaria Muchina & Another
    [1980] eKLR
  • John Florence Maritime Services Limited & Another –vs- Cabinet Secretary for Transport and Infrastructure & 3 Others
    [2015] eKLR
  • Attorney General & another
    (2012) eKLR
  • Omondi –vs- NBK & Others
    (2001) EA 177
  • Njanju –vs- Wambugu and another, Nairobi HCCC No. 2340 of 1991
    unreported
  • Mwinyi Hamisi Ali –vs- The Attorney General and Philemon Mwaisaka, Mombasa HCCC No. 732 of 1991
  • Civil Appeal No. 125 of 1997, Mwinyi Hamisi Ali –vs- The Attorney General and Philemon Mwaisaka Wawaka
Jurisdiction invoked
Articles 23(1), 165(5), 165(6) and (7) of the Constitution; Environment and Land Court Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "County Government of Kilifi &another; v Registrar of Titles & Others [2021] KEELC 2810 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in extract (Constitutional Petition, Environment and Land Court, Mombasa). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/2810/eng@2021-06-10

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