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 on the face of the judgment (appeal from Kajiado CM ELC Case No. E093 of 2022)· [2025] KEELC 701 (KLR)

Makini Housing Co-operative Society Limited & 2 others v Mwangi & 4 others (Environment and Land Appeal E024 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 701 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
20 February 2025
1,556 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

#

A Kenyan court confirmed that being wrongly named in a lawsuit does not get you removed — the case continues and you can argue your innocence at trial.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an appeal to the Environment and Land Court at Kajiado against a ruling of Hon. V. Kachuodho (R.M) delivered on 24th October 2023 in CM ELC Case No. E093 of 2022, in which the trial magistrate declined to strike out the 2nd and 3rd Appellants (alleged agents of the 1st Appellant) from the suit, holding that fraud pleaded against them could only be ventilated and determined at full hearing. The appeal was canvassed by written submissions. The Appellants argued that the 2nd and 3rd Appellants, being agents of a disclosed principal, could not be sued; that their joinder was a misjoinder; and that no reasonable cause of action was disclosed against them, relying on Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules and various authorities. The Respondents countered that joinder of necessary parties aids a just determination under Order 1 Rule 9; that agents may be liable for fraud, misrepresentation and deceit; and that the 2nd and 3rd Appellants received the money paid and had engaged in activities to undermine the Respondents' case. The court framed three issues: whether the trial magistrate erred in failing to strike out the 2nd and 3rd Appellants; whether the appeal was merited; and who should bear costs. Applying Order 1 Rule 9 and the Court of Appeal decisions in Mangira v Assets Recovery Agency and Nature Pharmacy Ltd v Gichuhi, the court held that misjoinder cannot defeat a suit, that any erroneous joinder is curable and non-fatal, and that striking out the parties would be more injurious than retaining them. The appeal was dismissed with costs to the Respondents.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether agents of a disclosed principal, alleged to have been joined for misjoinder, should be struck out of a suit

Holding

The trial magistrate did not err in declining to strike out the 2nd and 3rd Appellants; fraud had been pleaded against them and could only be determined at full hearing, and misjoinder cannot defeat a suit

Reasoning

Order 1 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules provides that no suit is defeated by misjoinder or non-joinder of parties. The Amended Plaint pleaded fraud/extortion against the 2nd and 3rd Appellants, who allegedly had 'footprints' all over the suit. Should they later be found wrongly enjoined, that determination is curable; striking them out and later finding they ought to have been parties is more injurious. Article 159(2)(d) supports avoiding procedural technicalities.

p. 4
02

Whether the appeal was merited

Holding

The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed

Reasoning

Having considered the grounds of appeal, the record, rival submissions and authorities, the court found the trial magistrate properly exercised her discretion in retaining the 2nd and 3rd Appellants as parties given the pleaded fraud allegations requiring ventilation at full hearing.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • No suit shall be defeated by reason of the misjoinder or non-joinder of parties; the court may deal with the matter in controversy as regards the parties actually before it
  • A determination that a party was wrongly enjoined is curable and not fatal; striking out a party who ought to have been before the court is the greater injury

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal is dismissed with costs to the Respondents

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 1 Rule 9
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 1 Rule 10(2)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 159(2)(d)

Cases cited (8)

  • Kepha Marita Okemwa suing as the Personal representative of the Estate of Johnsom Okemwa Nyakundi vs Mega Choice Ltd & another
    [2021] eKLR
  • City Council of Nairobi vs Wilfred Kamau Githua t/a Githua Associates & another
    [2016] eKLR
  • Anthony Francis Wareheim t/a Wareheim & 2 others vs Kenya Post Office Savings Bank
  • Afroplast Industries Ltd vs Sanlam Insurance Co. Ltd & another
    [2021] eKLR
  • Wash tech Kenya Ltd & another vs Vivo Energy Kenya Ltd
    [2020] eKLR
  • Blue Shield Insurance Co. Ltd vs Joseph Oguttu Mboya
  • Mangira & another v Assets Recovery Agency; Ali Cars Limited (Interested Party)
    [2024] KECA 1488 (KLR)
  • Nature Pharmacy Ltd & another v Gichuhi
    [2022] KECA 827 (KLR)
On appeal from
Magistrates' Court (Kajiado)
CM ELC Case No. E093 of 2022
Jurisdiction invoked
First appeal to the Environment and Land Court from the magistrates' court (statutory appeal jurisdiction; specific provision not stated in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Makini Housing Co-operative Society Limited & 2 others v Mwangi & 4 others (Environment and Land Appeal E024 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 701 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated on the face of the judgment (appeal from Kajiado CM ELC Case No. E093 of 2022). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/701/eng@2025-02-20

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