Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherNot stated in judgment (ELC, Embu)· [2024] KEELC 3600 (KLR)

Mukabi (Suing on His Own Behalf and on Behalf of Gekara Clan) v Mbugi & 26 others (Environment & Land Case 24 of 2016) [2024] KEELC 3600 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
23 April 2024
1,181 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

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Embu (A. Kaniaru J, delivered 23 April 2024) determines a preliminary objection dated 21 June 2023 and filed by the 26th and 27th defendants, who argued that the plaintiff's suit offended Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 because prayers 1A and 2 of the plaint sought what should properly be pursued by judicial review - certiorari to quash a decision of the Land Registrar and mandamus to compel reinstatement of Appeal No. 113 of 1999 for hearing. They also noted the omission of the Mbeere South District Land Adjudication Officer from the amended plaint, and urged dismissal of the suit. The 1st, 3rd to 25th defendants supported the objection, adding that the suit was time-barred and that the plaintiff was a stranger to the appeal sought to be reinstated. The plaintiff opposed, contending he lacked locus standi for judicial review, that his issues could not be addressed through judicial review, and that the respondent in the ministerial appeal, Rugano Nthiga, was deceased when it was withdrawn. The court applied the classic test in Mukhisa Biscuit Co Ltd v West End Distributors, holding that a preliminary objection must raise a pure point of law on undisputed facts; here all material facts were disputed, so the objection should have been raised at trial. The principal prayer being declaratory, Order 3 rule 9 permits it, and in Nicholas Njeru v Attorney General a similar objection was rejected. The objection was dismissed with no orders as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Nature and scope of a preliminary objection

Holding

A preliminary objection must raise a pure point of law on assumed pleaded facts; it fails where facts are disputed

Reasoning

Relying on Mukhisa Biscuit and Muiruri v Kimemia, the court held an objection loses validity where the facts underlying it require probing by the court. Since all material facts in this suit are disputed, the Order 53 objection should have been raised at trial or in submissions after trial, not preliminarily.

p. 3
02

Whether declaratory relief must be sought by judicial review

Holding

No - a declaratory suit is competent and the court retains discretion to grant declaratory orders notwithstanding that judicial review could also have fitted

Reasoning

Order 3 rule 9 permits suits seeking merely declaratory orders. In Nicholas Njeru, a similar objection was rejected; courts have no limit on their power to grant declaratory orders. The principal prayer here being declaratory, the suit must be heard on its merits.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A preliminary objection raises a pure point of law and cannot be raised if any fact has to be ascertained
  • Suits in which declaratory orders are sought are to be heard on merits; objections seeking to terminate them preliminarily are discouraged

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The preliminary objection dated 21/6/2023 is dismissed
  2. 2.No orders as to costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 53
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 3 rule 9

Cases cited (7)

  • Cyril J. Haroo & another vs Uchumi Services Limited & 3 others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Muiruri vs. Kimemia
    [2002] 2KLR 677
  • Mukhisa Biscuit Co. Limited vs. West End Distributors Ltd
    [1969] EA 696
  • Eunice Karimi Kibunja vs. Mwirigi M' Ringera Kibunja; C.A No. 103 of 1996, Nyeri
    [1996] eKLR
  • Peter Ngugi Kabiri vs. Esther Wangari Githinji & Another
    [2015] eKLR
  • Kutima Investiments Limited vs. Muthoni Kihara & Another
    [2015] eKLR
  • Nicholas Njeru vs. Attorney General & 8 Others
    [2013] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Environment and Land Court Act (original jurisdiction; Civil Procedure Rules, Order 53 raised by defendants)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mukabi (Suing on His Own Behalf and on Behalf of Gekara Clan) v Mbugi & 26 others (Environment & Land Case 24 of 2016) [2024] KEELC 3600 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in judgment (ELC, Embu). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/3600/eng@2024-04-23

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