Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissednot stated in excerpt· [2024] KEELC 3842 (KLR)

Karani v Shunem Academy Limited & another (Environment and Land Case 70B of 2021) [2024] KEELC 3842 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
7 May 2024
1,456 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed it can hear eviction and trespass claims based on a lease, even when money damages are sought.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling on a preliminary objection raised by the defendants challenging the jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court at Nakuru. The plaintiff sued alleging that he entered into a lease agreement, represented by the 2nd Defendant on behalf of the 1st Defendant, over premises standing on parcels Dundori/Lanet Block 5/15, 5/16 and 5/17 (Kiamunyeki 'A'), complied with the lease, but was unlawfully evicted in or around February 2019. He sought a declaration of unlawful eviction, general and exemplary damages, and in the alternative one year's rent and goodwill in lieu of notice. The 1st Defendant, by Amended Defence and Counterclaim, challenged the validity of the lease, alleged trespass, and sought general damages for trespass. The defendants objected that the suit was intrinsically a commercial dispute over compensation for breach of contract, not a land dispute within Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution, and that entertaining it would defeat the purpose of the ELC's establishment. The plaintiff relied on section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act, submitting that the dispute concerns use and occupation of, and trespass to, land. The court held that the gravamen of both the suit and the counterclaim revolves on use and occupation of the suit parcels - breach of lease, unlawful eviction and trespass - and that it therefore has exclusive jurisdiction. The preliminary objection was dismissed with costs on 7 May 2024.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction of the ELC over a claim for damages for wrongful eviction founded on a lease agreement

Holding

The court has, indeed exclusive, jurisdiction because the gravamen of the suit is use and occupation of land under a lease, and the reliefs sought are ancillary to that use and occupation.

Reasoning

The court reasoned that the plaintiff's claim is anchored on his use and occupation of the suit parcels under a lease agreement, and his eviction from them. The damages sought arise as a direct or indirect consequence of the alleged unlawful eviction. Section 13(2)(d) of the Environment and Land Court Act covers disputes relating to private land and contracts or instruments granting enforceable interests in land, so the claim is not a purely commercial dispute outside the court's remit.

p. 2
02

Jurisdiction over the 1st Defendant's counterclaim for trespass

Holding

The trespass counterclaim likewise falls within the court's jurisdiction as a dispute concerning entry onto and use of land.

Reasoning

The 1st Defendant alleged that the plaintiff's ingress onto the suit property was illegal and claimed general damages for trespass. The court held that a grievance about alleged illegal entry onto and use of land is trespass, which is a dispute relating to occupation and use of land, and therefore falls within the broad jurisdiction donated by Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A dispute founded on a lease agreement concerning use and occupation of identified parcels of land falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court under Article 162(2)(b) and section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act, even where the relief sought is damages for breach of the lease or wrongful eviction.
  • A claim for trespass to land is a dispute relating to the use and occupation of land within the ELC's jurisdiction.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The preliminary objection is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the preliminary objection awarded to the plaintiff
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 and section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2011

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Karani v Shunem Academy Limited & another (Environment and Land Case 70B of 2021) [2024] KEELC 3842 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). not stated in excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/3842/eng@2024-05-07

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