Maria v Repando (Environment and Land Case E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 5827 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court struck out a land suit because the same parties had already settled the identical dispute through a court-adopted consent in an earlier case.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the suit is barred by res judicata under Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act
The suit is res judicata because the same parties settled the same subject matter in Kwale CMELC No. E005 of 2023 through a consent adopted as a judgment of the court on 24th May, 2023.
The court examined the annexures, particularly the consent marked 'MAR-2', and found it was adopted as a consent judgment. The former suit involved the same parties, same subject matter and same issues. The plaintiff neither sought review nor appealed against the consent judgment, so re-litigating the same dispute offends Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act, which guarantees finality of litigation and bars multiplicity of suits.
Who bears the costs of the application
Costs of the application and the suit were awarded to the Defendant/Applicant as the successful party.
The court applied the principle in Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act that costs follow the event, supported by Harun Mutwiri v Nairobi City County Government, Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers v Bidco Africa Limited and Hussein Muhumed Sirat v Attorney General, holding the successful party entitled to costs absent exceptional circumstances.
Legal principles established
#- A consent order adopted by the court becomes a consent judgment of the court and is final; a subsequent suit over the same subject matter between the same parties is res judicata.
- The doctrine of res judicata requires five conditions to coexist: same matter directly and substantially in issue, same parties or privies, litigating under the same title, a competent court, and a final decision.
- Costs follow the event under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and the successful party is typically entitled to costs.
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion application dated 5th March, 2025 be and is hereby found to have merit and is allowed in its entirety.
- 2.This Court finds that the instant suit has the elements of res judicata.
- 3.The suit be and is hereby found to be incompetent thus be and is hereby struck out.
- 4.The costs of the Application and the suit to be borne by the Plaintiff/Respondent.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 7 of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap. 21; Order 2 Rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010; Section 28 of the Environment and Land Act, No. 19 of 2011; Article 159 of the Constitution
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Maria v Repando (Environment and Land Case E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 5827 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5827/eng@2025-06-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.