Ogunja (Suing on his own behalf as well as an official on behalf of the Otiende Estate Self Help Group) & 4 others v County Government of Kakamega (Environment and Land Petition E001, E002 & E003 of 2023 (Consolidated)) [2024] KEELC 3768 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court dismissed tenants' constitutional challenge to Kakamega County eviction notices, ruling that a landlord-tenant dispute must be fought in an ordinary contract suit.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the petitions disclose a constitutional issue
The petitions disclose no constitutional issue; the dispute is purely contractual between landlord and tenant and must be pursued in an ordinary suit under the law of contract and the lease terms.
The petitioners admitted a landlord-tenant relationship with the respondent. The court applied the principle of constitutional avoidance: where adequate alternative or statutory remedies exist, they must be pursued rather than constitutional jurisdiction. The petitioners themselves argued the validity of the termination notice against the lease terms, confirming the contractual nature of the dispute. Claims to housing rights under Article 43(b) and public participation under Article 10 could not convert the contractual dispute into a constitutional one.
Whether the right to information under Article 35 was violated
No violation; tenants who admit a contractual relationship through lease agreements cannot claim ignorance of the details of that relationship.
The petitioners alleged the respondent failed to supply documents about the allocation of the houses. The court held that having admitted the existence of lease agreements and a landlord-tenant relationship, the petitioners could not claim they were unaware of the details of their own contractual relationship, so no breach of Article 35 arose.
Whether the reliefs sought should issue
The reliefs cannot issue; the consolidated petitions lack merit and are dismissed with no order as to costs.
Since no constitutional issue was disclosed, the constitutional reliefs of declarations, certiorari, prohibition, damages and alternative housing could not be granted. The court found no merit in any of the three consolidated petitions and dismissed them with no order as to costs.
Legal principles established
#- Where ample alternative or statutory avenues exist for resolution of a dispute, they must be followed and constitutional jurisdiction should not be invoked (principle of constitutional avoidance).
- An ordinary contractual dispute between landlord and tenant cannot be brought as a constitutional petition.
Court orders
#- 1.The consolidated petitions (ELC Petition Numbers E001, E002 and E003 of 2023) are dismissed
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Constitution of Kenya, 2010 (Articles 10, 21(2), 27, 35, 40, 43, 47 as invoked by the petitioners; petition jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ogunja (Suing on his own behalf as well as an official on behalf of the Otiende Estate Self Help Group) & 4 others v County Government of Kakamega (Environment and Land Petition E001, E002 & E003 of 2023 (Consolidated)) [2024] KEELC 3768 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). ELC Petition Number E001 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/3768/eng@2024-04-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.