Mainland Properties Limited v Attorney General & 3 others (Environment & Land Petition 13 of 2018) [2025] KEELC 3052 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Mombasa court struck out an attempt by 1,389 unnamed people to overturn a land judgment, stressing that parties must be identified and review grounds strictly met.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the threshold for review/setting aside the judgment of 11th April 2024 was met
Not met; the correct provision for setting aside was Order 10 Rule 11 rather than Order 12 Rules 6 & 7, and in any event setting aside would not alter the 2017 decree in HCCC No. 503 of 2011
The court restated the section 80/Order 45 review grounds and the principles for setting aside ex parte judgments, then applied them. It held the petition merely enforced the decree of 9th February 2017 in HCCC No. 503 of 2011 where title and possession were decided. Complaints about non-service and planted respondents belonged in that suit, where the applicants admitted they were parties with legal representation.
Whether the unidentified 1388 applicants could prosecute the application through Mwadziwe Saha
No; the applicants were not disclosed and no consents were filed, so no effective order could issue for or against them
The petitioner objected that only Kazungu Kalama's name was disclosed and no IDs or power of attorney were annexed. The court held that even assuming authority, a ruling could not issue for or against unidentified persons, requiring parties to be named and written consents filed in representative suits.
Whether a disciplinary show-cause order should issue against Ms. Sharifi & Company Advocates
Refused as raised before the wrong forum
The applicants, being represented by counsel in this application, were directed to lodge any complaint against the advocate before the appropriate disciplinary forum rather than seek such relief incidentally in this application.
Legal principles established
#- Review is governed by section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rule 1, which restrict the grounds to discovery of new and important matter, error apparent on the face of the record, or any other sufficient reason, applied for without unreasonable delay
- In representative suits, parties must be named and written consents of those represented must be obtained and filed
- Costs follow the event under section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act unless the court for good cause directs otherwise
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 23rd May 2024 is without merit and is hereby struck out
- 2.The petitioner's costs in the said application to be borne by Mwadziwe Saha
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 159(d) of the Constitution; sections 1A, 1B, 3, 3A and 63(e) of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 12 Rules 6 & 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mainland Properties Limited v Attorney General & 3 others (Environment & Land Petition 13 of 2018) [2025] KEELC 3052 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Constitutional Petition No. 13 of 2018 – Notice of Motion dated 23rd May 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/3052/eng@2025-04-02
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.