Kariuki & 6 others (Suing on their behalf & as representatives of Kasarini Farmers' Co-operative Society & Karani Self Help Group) v Mbugua & 10 others
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court refused to revive a land suit that had lapsed after the defendants died, because the plaintiffs waited years without a good reason.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether sufficient cause was shown to revive the abated suit and extend time for substitution
No sufficient cause was shown; the Plaintiffs knew of the deaths by 2018 yet filed the revival application only in August 2022, and their explanation of challenges in identifying legal representatives was not specific.
The court traced the dates of death of the deceased Defendants, noting most died years before the application. The Plaintiffs' 2018 application had been struck out after a ruling that the suit had abated, yet they waited two more years. Their claimed difficulties in locating administrators were not particularised, and the estates had already been distributed, so revival would occasion prejudice.
Effect of abatement under Order 24 rule 4(3) of the Civil Procedure Rules
It was uncontested that the suit had abated; an abated suit is non-existent until revived and abatement occurs automatically by passage of time.
Relying on Said Sweilem Gheithan Saanum v Commissioner of Lands, the court set out the three stages under Order 24: joinder of the legal representative within time, abatement after one year, and revival upon sufficient cause. Where a suit abates, no fresh suit can be brought on the same cause of action.
Claims against Defendants who died before the suit was filed
The 5th and 8th Defendants died before the filing of the suit, so the suit against them was a nullity and cannot be revived.
The court noted the 5th Defendant died on 5th May 1997 and the 8th on 16th May 2008, both before the 2009 filing. Adopting the earlier observation of Okongó J, the court held those claims were a nullity, making revival of the claim against them impossible in law.
Legal principles established
#- An abated suit ceases to exist in the eye of the law and cannot be revived unless sufficient cause for the failure to implead the legal representative within one year is shown
- The court's discretion to revive an abated suit must be exercised upon being persuaded that there is sufficient cause
- Equity aids the vigilant and not the indolent
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 17th August 2022 is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the Respondents in the said application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court; discretionary powers under Order 24 of the Civil Procedure Rules to extend time and revive an abated suit
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kariuki & 6 others (Suing on their behalf & as representatives of Kasarini Farmers' Co-operative Society & Karani Self Help Group) v Mbugua & 10 others", Case Analysis (2023). Environment & Land Case 557 of 2009. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/16679/eng@2023-03-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.