Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedELC Case No. 61 of 2019 (seeking transfer of ELC Case No. 9 of 2019 from Ruiru SPM Court)· [2021] KEELC 3769 (KLR)

Esther Wangui Wanjohi v Kellen Muthoni Kibara [2021] KEELC 3769 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
8 April 2021
2,080 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan land dispute was sent back to the Environment and Land Court after it emerged that the magistrate's court hearing it had no legal power to decide it.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a Notice of Motion dated 19th November 2019 by the plaintiff, Esther Wangui Wanjohi, seeking transfer of ELC Case No. 9 of 2019 from the Senior Principal Magistrate's Court at Ruiru to the Environment and Land Court at Thika, with costs in the cause. The plaintiff had filed the suit in the ELC Thika on 4th April 2019, but the court on its own motion transferred it to the Ruiru SPM Court. At the hearing, a valuation report placed the suit property's value beyond the SPM Court's pecuniary jurisdiction, and the plaintiff's own revaluation put each of the 12 plots at about Kshs. 2,000,000. The defendant opposed, arguing the plaintiff knew of the subdivisions when filing, the objection came too late after witnesses had testified, and a suit filed in a court without jurisdiction cannot be transferred. The court framed one issue: whether the application was merited. Relying on Section 18 of the Civil Procedure Act and the Hangzhou Agrochemicals and Kithita Ngeana authorities, the court held that jurisdiction is everything and cannot be conferred by the court or the parties; since the suit was originally filed in a court with jurisdiction, the transfer to the Ruiru SPM Court was null and void ab initio. The application was allowed entirely, with the file transferred back to the ELC Thika and costs in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the suit should be transferred from the Ruiru SPM Court to the Environment and Land Court, Thika

Holding

The application was allowed; the transfer to the SPM Court was null and void ab initio because that court lacked pecuniary jurisdiction and the suit was originally filed in a court possessed of jurisdiction.

Reasoning

The suit was initially filed in the ELC Thika, which had jurisdiction, but was transferred on its own motion to the Ruiru SPM Court on the basis of insufficient documents. Since jurisdiction is conferred by law and cannot be conferred by the court or the parties, the erroneous transfer was void, and the file had to be returned to the ELC Thika.

p. 3
02

Whether the late raising of the jurisdictional objection defeats the application

Holding

No. A jurisdictional objection may be raised at any time, including at the appeal stage.

Reasoning

The defendant argued that the plaintiff's objection to jurisdiction came too late, after witnesses had testified. The court held that jurisdiction being fundamental, its absence can be raised at any stage, and without jurisdiction the court must down its tools regardless of the stage the proceedings reached.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Jurisdiction is everything; a court without jurisdiction must down its tools, and jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent of the parties.
  • A transfer of a suit to a court lacking pecuniary jurisdiction is null and void ab initio.
  • The issue of jurisdiction may be raised at any time, even at the appeal stage.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Suit No. ELC Case No. 9 of 2019 (Esther Wangui Wanjohi v Kellen Muthoni Kibara) transferred from the Senior Principal Magistrate's Court, Ruiru back to the Environment and Land Court at Thika for hearing and determination
  2. 2.Costs to be in the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSection 18
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 21 rule 1

Cases cited (3)

  • Hangzhou Agrochemicals Industries Ltd v Panda Flowers Ltd
    (2012) eKLR
  • Kithita Ngeana v Mwaniki Kisume
    [2018] eKLR
  • David Kabungu Case (Supra)
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 18 of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Esther Wangui Wanjohi v Kellen Muthoni Kibara [2021] KEELC 3769 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). ELC Case No. 61 of 2019 (seeking transfer of ELC Case No. 9 of 2019 from Ruiru SPM Court). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/3769/eng@2021-04-08

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