Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedOriginating Summons dated 24th February 2023 (formerly ELC Mombasa, transferred to Malindi ELC)· [2024] KEELC 5679 (KLR)

Multhoff-Sama v Registrar of Lands Mombasa Land Registry (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E008 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 5679 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
31 July 2024
4,170 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~17 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court refused to recognise a German probate decision because Germany is not a reciprocating country and the case belonged in a succession court.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This Environment and Land Court at Malindi ruling dismissed an Originating Summons dated 24th February 2023 filed by Elizabeth Joram William Multhofi-Sama, formerly lodged in ELC Mombasa and transferred to Malindi. The applicant sought recognition of a decision of the Local Court of Kassel, Germany, appointing solicitor Holger Adolph as administrator of the estate of her late ex-husband Hardy Multhofi, recognition of a purchase agreement over residential property on Portion No. 2549 Malindi Central, and an order directing the Mombasa Lands Registrar to register a transfer to her. The court framed two issues: whether a judgment enforceable under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act existed, and whether the orders should issue. It held the German decision merely approved a premeditated sale rather than constituting a judgment, that no decision appointing the administrator was exhibited, and that Germany is not a reciprocating country under the Act's schedule. The court further held that the matter was in substance a succession issue outside the ELC's jurisdiction; that recognition would offend public policy since the heirless estate had escheated to the State as bona vacantia; and that in any event the summons, filed over six years after the 2015 decision, would have been time-barred under section 5 of the Act. The OS was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the German decision constituted a judgment enforceable under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act

Holding

It did not; it merely approved a solicitor's premeditated sale and was not a judgment for money or property, nor was any appointing decision exhibited

Reasoning

The court examined the verbatim text of the German decision and found it only approved a sale transaction for the benefit of unknown heirs. It was not a merits-based decision awarding land, and the respondent was not a party to the foreign proceedings. Section 17 of the Act excludes proceedings other than those by way of judgment, and no judgment appointing the administrator was exhibited.

p. 4
02

Whether the German court was a designated court in a reciprocating country

Holding

No; the reciprocating schedule lists only Australia, Malawi, Seychelles, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, the United Kingdom and Rwanda, and Germany's courts were not specified

Reasoning

Section 13 of the Act permits extension to non-Commonwealth countries by order specifying their superior courts. The schedule to the Extension Order does not include Germany, so the applicant failed to establish that the decision emanated from a designated court in a reciprocating country.

p. 6
03

Whether the ELC had jurisdiction over the originating summons

Holding

It did not; the OS is in substance a succession matter, and the ELC's jurisdiction covers land disputes, not succession

Reasoning

Article 162(2)(b) and Section 13(1) ELCA confer jurisdiction over environment and land disputes. There being no land dispute, and the OS seeking recognition of an administrator's appointment, the matter falls outside the ELC's jurisdiction. Proper proceedings would have been a succession cause under the Law of Succession Act.

p. 6
04

Whether recognition would offend Kenyan public policy given escheat of heirless property

Holding

It would; where a person dies intestate without heirs, the estate escheats to the State as bona vacantia, so the solicitor lacked capacity to sell the deceased's share

Reasoning

The applicant herself confirmed the deceased had no heirs or beneficiaries. Under Kenyan law such property becomes bona vacantia and escheats to the State. Recognizing a sale by a solicitor whose appointment was unproven, under foreign law not demonstrated to be consistent with Kenyan law, would be contrary to public policy and national interests.

p. 8
05

Whether the originating summons was time-barred

Holding

Yes, had a valid judgment existed; the 2015 decision was not brought for registration until February 2023, beyond the six-year period

Reasoning

Section 5 of the Act requires an application for registration of a foreign judgment within six years of the date of the judgment. The German decision is dated 22/10/2015 and the OS was lodged on 27/2/2023, more than six years later, so even a valid judgment would have failed on limitation grounds.

p. 9

Legal principles established

#
  • A foreign decision that merely approves a sale by a solicitor/administrator is not a 'judgment' for a sum of money or delivery of property registrable and enforceable under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act
  • A registrable foreign judgment must come from a designated court in a reciprocating country; Germany is not listed in the reciprocating schedule
  • Recognition of a foreign appointment of an administrator of an estate is a succession matter outside the jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court
  • Enforcement of a foreign judgment must be initiated within six years of the date of the judgment
  • Where an intestate dies without heirs, the estate escheats to the State as bona vacantia and no third party acquires capacity to deal with it

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Originating Summons dated 24/2/2023 is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs awarded to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) ActSections 5, 6, 13, 17
  • Probate Act (sic) Cap 160Section 77
  • Civil Procedure ActSections 3 and 3A
  • Probate and Administration RulesRule 42(1)
  • Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) (Extension of) OrderRule 2 and Schedule
  • Constitution of KenyaArticles 62(1) and 162(2)(b), (3)
  • Environment and Land Court Act No. 9 of 2011Section 13(1)
  • Law of Succession ActSections 32 to 42, 35, 66; Part V
  • Government Lands Act (repealed)Section 8A

Cases cited (5)

  • In Re Haile Michael Desta Malu
    2017 eKLR NBI HC Misc. 85 of 2017
  • ABSA Bank Uganda Limited (Formerly Known as Barclays Bank of Uganda Limited) v Uchumi Supermarkets PLC
    (Civil Case E316 of 2020) [2021] KEHC 14 (KLR)
  • In The Matter Of The Estate Of Mariga Njuguna (Deceased)
    [2013] eKLR
  • Njoki v Pussy
    (Environment and Land Appeal E006 of 2022) [2023] KEELC 945 (KLR) (16 February 2023)
  • In Re Estate of Elijah Okitah Mikah Tsimbwele (Deceased)
    [2021] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 5 and 6 of the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act; Article 162(2)(b) and (3) of the Constitution and Section 13(1) of the Environment and Land Court Act on jurisdiction

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Multhoff-Sama v Registrar of Lands Mombasa Land Registry (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E008 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 5679 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Originating Summons dated 24th February 2023 (formerly ELC Mombasa, transferred to Malindi ELC). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/5679/eng@2024-07-31

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