Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedELC Case of 2017 (Plaint dated December 5, 2017); Notice of Motion dated August 4, 2021· [2022] KEELC 3539 (KLR)

Githatu & 8 others v Kihara & 9 others; Njora & 19 others (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 742 of 2017) [2022] KEELC 3539 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
9 June 2022
OAO. A. Angote
2,419 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~10 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court allowed 20 plot buyers to join a compensation lawsuit because their land purchases would be directly affected by the outcome.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The intended Interested Parties, described as innocent purchasers for value of plots hived from L.R. No. 13166 I.R 27109 at Kahawa West, moved the court by Notice of Motion dated August 4, 2021 seeking to be enjoined as parties to a suit whose main prayer is a declaration that compensation proceeds for land compulsorily acquired by the Government through the Kenya Urban Roads Authority for the Northern Bypass be divided amongst the shareholders of the affected parcels. The 9th Plaintiff acknowledged the purchases but maintained the applicants could only be witnesses. The 1st-6th Defendants opposed, contending the land has never been validly subdivided, remains held by the 21 original members as tenants in common, and that the applicants are strangers who should pursue joinder in ELC Case No. 348 of 2009. Applying Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules and the Supreme Court's tests in Muruatetu and Mumo Matemu, together with Pravin Bowry, Deported Asians Custodian Board and Civicon, the court found that the applicants had shown by affidavit and supporting documents - share certificates issued between 2009 and 2021 and sale agreements - a stake in the proceedings. Since the compulsory acquisition might bear on the portions they claim to have purchased, they would be affected by the decision and should be joined to champion their cause, the validity of their documents being a matter for trial. The application was allowed as prayed.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether purchasers of portions of the suit property have a stake justifying joinder as interested parties

Holding

Yes. The applicants produced share certificates and agreements showing they purchased portions of L.R. No. 13166; if the land they purchased falls within the compulsorily acquired portion, they will be affected by the court's decision on the compensation proceeds, so they should be joined to champion their cause.

Reasoning

The court applied Order 1 Rule 10(2) and Supreme Court authorities on interested parties. Although the validity of the applicants' share certificates and sale agreements would be determined at trial, the plaintiffs admitted that sub-plots had been sold and that the land was subdivided with county approval. The compulsory acquisition and compensation dispute therefore bore directly on the applicants' claimed interests, making their presence necessary for effective and complete adjudication.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • An intended interested party must demonstrate a clearly identifiable, proximate personal interest or stake in the matter and the prejudice to be suffered in case of non-joinder
  • All a party needs to do to be joined is demonstrate sufficient interest in the suit; the interest need not be one that must succeed at the trial

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated August 4, 2021 is allowed as prayed
  2. 2.The intended Interested Parties are enjoined as parties to the suit
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Githatu & 8 others v Kihara & 9 others; Njora & 19 others (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 742 of 2017) [2022] KEELC 3539 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). ELC Case of 2017 (Plaint dated December 5, 2017); Notice of Motion dated August 4, 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/3539/eng@2022-06-09

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