Golf Range Limited v Gitau & 7 others (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E023 of 2020) [2025] KEELC 105 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court threw out a landowner's second lawsuit over the same property, confirming you cannot re-litigate an already-decided dispute by simply adding new parties.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the instant suit is res judicata with respect to ELC No. 125 of 2017
The suit is res judicata; the addition of the 1st - 7th Defendants was a cosmetic facelift to evade the doctrine, and the cause of action and orders sought are the same as in the former suit.
The court applied the elements of res judicata from John Florence Maritime Services and Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act. Although the parties in the two suits differ, the Plaintiff is claiming adverse possession of the same suit property in both, seeking similar orders. Relying on Omondi v National Bank of Kenya, the court held that adding parties or causes of action cannot evade res judicata. The Plaintiff's failure to seek review of the prior judgment, and the fact that adverse possession lies only against a title holder, confirmed the finding.
Whether the Plaintiff's application for temporary injunction and consolidation could be granted
The application was dismissed because the suit itself is res judicata.
Having found the suit res judicata, the court declined to consider the injunctive and consolidation prayers. The application was predicated on the survival of the suit, which had been defeated by the doctrine of res judicata as pleaded in the Defendants' preliminary objection and notice of motion.
Whether the Defendants' positive orders (survey, beacon replacement, removal of structures) could be granted alongside dismissal of the suit
No; a party cannot seek dismissal of a suit while at the same time asking for positive orders regarding the suit property in the same suit.
The court held that having succeeded in having the suit dismissed as res judicata, the Defendants could not obtain positive prayers within that same suit; they must file a distinct suit. The application was therefore only partially allowed to the extent of dismissal and costs.
Legal principles established
#- A claim of adverse possession can only lie as against a title holder, and not people holding letters of allotment
- Parties cannot evade the doctrine of res judicata by merely adding other parties or causes of action in a subsequent suit
- A litigant who fails to exercise the right of review cannot re-litigate the same matter in a fresh suit
Court orders
#- 1.The Originating Summons dated 30th October 2020 be and is hereby dismissed by reason of being Res Judicata
- 2.The Plaintiff to pay the costs of the suit and the applications
- 3.The Plaintiff's application dated 30th October 2020 is dismissed
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B, 3A, 7 and 8 of the Civil Procedure Act and the Civil Procedure Rules, on the suit and interlocutory applications
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Golf Range Limited v Gitau & 7 others (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E023 of 2020) [2025] KEELC 105 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELC Case (Originating Summons dated 30th October 2020). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/105/eng@2025-01-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.