Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2021] KEELC 2831 (KLR)

Sam &Steve; Properties Limited v Eunice Muthoni [2021] KEELC 2831 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
22 June 2021
COChristine Ochieng
1,268 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court allowed a land buyer's company to join an ongoing property lawsuit because it had a real stake in the outcome.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a ruling on the Defendant's Notice of Motion dated 28th May 2019 seeking to enjoin Bederoeuma Company Limited as an interested party in a land suit before the Environment and Land Court at Kajiado. The applicant, through its director Eunice Muthoni, contended that the suit properties (Kajiado/Kipeto/3462 to 3554) had been sold to it by the Plaintiff under a 2013 accord, that it was a bona fide purchaser for value whose interests were overlooked in the pleadings, and that its exclusion would cause grave injustice. The Plaintiff, through director Samuel Ndiba Kihara, opposed the application, arguing that the suit concerned the Defendant's alleged interference with the properties, that no authority was given to the Defendant, that the sale agreement was unenforceable for non-payment of the purchase price, and that the properties remain registered in the Plaintiff's name. The sole issue was whether Bederoeuma Co. Ltd should be enjoined. The court, per Christine Ochieng J, noted the Plaintiff's own admission in its witness statement, the defence references, and the replying affidavit, all confirming existence of a sale agreement. Applying Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules and following the Trusted Society of Human Rights v Mumo Matemo and Joseph Njau Kingori principles, the court held the company's presence necessary for complete adjudication and enforcement of any decree, without prejudice to the Plaintiff. The application was allowed with costs in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether Bederoeuma Company Limited should be joined as an interested party under Order 1 Rule 10(2)

Holding

Joinder allowed; the company's presence is necessary for complete adjudication and no prejudice to the plaintiff.

Reasoning

The court noted admissions of a sale agreement between the plaintiff and the intended interested party in the plaintiff's witness statement, the defence, and the replying affidavit. Applying Order 1 Rule 10(2) and the cited authorities, the court found the company a necessary party whose presence is required to effectually and completely adjudicate and to enforce any decree, with no prejudice to the plaintiff.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An interested party is one with a stake in the proceedings who will be affected by the court's decision and whose interest cannot be adequately articulated absent joinder.
  • Guiding principles for joinder of an intending interested party include necessity, propriety, enforceability of the decree and the need to enable the court to effectually and completely adjudicate.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 28th May 2019 is allowed and Bederoeuma Company Limited is enjoined in the suit as an interested party
  2. 2.Costs will be in the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Rulessections 1A, 1B and 3A
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 1 Rule 10(2)

Cases cited (7)

  • Dalip Singh Karam v Anderji Odhavji Nathwani
    (1949) LRK 49
  • Charles Karuri Mbutu v Samuel Muhoro
    Civil Appeal 127 of 1999
  • Kiai Mbaki & Others v Gichuhi Macharia & Another
    Civil Appeal 178 of 2002
  • Hon. John Njoroge Michuki & Another v Kentazuga Hardware Limited
    Civil Application 16 of 1998
  • Ezzi Paints & Hardware v Rahisi Stores & Another
    Civil Application No. 231 of 1998
  • Trusted Society of Human Rights v Mumo Matemo & 5 others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Joseph Njau Kingori v Robert Maina Chege & 3 others
    [2002] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Sam &Steve; Properties Limited v Eunice Muthoni [2021] KEELC 2831 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/2831/eng@2021-06-22

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