Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissed· [2024] KEELC 4248 (KLR)

Matati & another v Ikhungu & another (Environment and Land Appeal E007 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 4248 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
16 May 2024
1,395 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 High Court confirmed that suing over a property that no longer exists is groundless, and courts can strike such suits out mid-trial.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a first appeal to the High Court at Eldoret (E. O. Obaga, J) against a ruling by a trial magistrate who, mid-trial and immediately after the 1st Appellant's testimony and before re-examination, struck out the Appellants' suit under Order 2 Rule 15(1)(a) of the Civil Procedure Rules for disclosing no reasonable cause of action, with costs to the Respondents. The suit had sought rectification of records and eviction of the 1st Defendant from Eldoret Municipality Block 15/488; the 1st Respondent had counterclaimed for a permanent injunction in respect of Eldoret Municipality Block 15/2319. The Appellants argued their right to be heard was violated. Reviewing the record as a first appellate court and applying the retrial principles in Gitobu Imanyara, the court found the suit was groundless: the suit property had been subdivided in 1992 between the deceased and the 1st Respondent, who obtained a certificate of lease in 2003; the 1st Appellant purportedly purchased the non-existent parcel in 2012 and obtained a confirmation of grant over it in 2017, despite knowing of the 1st Respondent's possession, and an official search in 2019 showed title in the names of the deceased and the 1st Respondent. The court found no fault in the ruling, dismissed the appeal with costs to the Respondents, and left the 1st Respondent free to proceed with his counterclaim, which the trial magistrate had not determined. Judgment delivered on 16 May 2024.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether striking out the suit under Order 2 Rule 15(1)(a) was justified

Holding

Yes - the suit property no longer existed, having been subdivided, and the 1st Appellant knew the title was held by the deceased and the 1st Respondent, so the suit disclosed no reasonable cause of action

Reasoning

The suit property had been subdivided in 1992 and the 1st Respondent obtained title to his half in 2003. The 1st Appellant purportedly purchased the entire, now non-existent, parcel in 2012 and obtained a confirmation of grant over it in 2017 despite an official search in 2019 showing title in the names of the deceased and the 1st Respondent. A suit over a non-existent parcel was groundless and properly struck out.

p. 3
02

First appeal duty

Holding

A first appeal is by way of retrial; the appellate court must reconsider and evaluate the evidence and draw its own conclusions

Reasoning

Relying on Gitobu Imanyara & 2 others v Attorney General, the court restated the principles for first appeals: reconsider the evidence, evaluate it and draw its own conclusions while making due allowance for not having seen or heard the witnesses. Applying that standard, the court found no fault in the trial magistrate's ruling.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • On a first appeal, the court is under a duty to re-evaluate the evidence and arrive at its own conclusions

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Appellants' appeal is dismissed with costs to the Respondents
  2. 2.The 1st Respondent is at liberty to proceed with his counterclaim, the trial magistrate having made no finding on it

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 2 Rule 15(1)(a)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 2 Rule 15(1)

Cases cited (2)

  • Kivanga Estates Limited v National Bank of Kenya Ltd (2017) eKLR
    (2017) eKLR
  • Gitobu Imanyara & 2 others v Attorney General (2016) eKLR
    (2016) eKLR
On appeal from
Magistrates' Court
Not stated
Jurisdiction invoked
First appeal from the trial magistrate's court

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Matati & another v Ikhungu & another (Environment and Land Appeal E007 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 4248 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/4248/eng@2024-05-16

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