Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherNot stated in the judgment provided· [2025] KEELC 6118 (KLR)

Mengich & 6 others v Nathan (Environment and Land Case E023 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 6118 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
16 September 2025
GOG M A Ongondo
708 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is an interlocutory ruling of the Environment and Land Court delivered virtually on 16th September 2025 by G M A Ongondo J in a dispute over land parcel Nandi/Ndalat/Settlement/1081. Two matters were before the court: a notice of motion dated 10th September 2025 filed by seven applicants through Rotich, Langat and Company Advocates, and a preliminary objection dated 16th September 2025 filed by the defendant/respondent through Kalya and Company Advocates, raising pure points of law including locus standi and limitation of actions, said to be capable of disposing of the entire suit. Both counsel concurred that the preliminary objection be heard first, and plaintiffs' counsel additionally sought that it be disposed of by written submissions and that status quo over the suit land be maintained. Respondent's counsel opposed the status quo order, arguing no danger to the applicants had been demonstrated. The court held that under Article 159(2)(b) and (e) of the Constitution, Practice Direction No. 32 of the ELC Practice Directions 2014, sections 3 and 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act 2015 and sections 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, it had power to preserve the subject matter and to expedite the preliminary objection, citing Kakuta Maimai Hamisi v Peris Pesi Tobiko & 2 others (2013) eKLR on the need for promptitude. The court ordered that the preliminary objection take precedence, be heard by written submissions on a two-day filing timeline, maintained status quo over the land in the respondent's name barring any disposal, and fixed mention for 25th September 2025. No costs order was made. The substantive application and suit remain pending.

Key legal issues

#
01

Priority of the preliminary objection over the inter-partes application

Holding

The preliminary objection raising pure points of law (locus standi and limitation of actions) takes precedence and is to be heard by written submissions without delay

Reasoning

Counsel for both parties concurred that the preliminary objection raising pure points of law capable of disposing of the suit be heard first. Guided by Article 159(2)(b) and (e) on expeditious disposal of justice and the authority in Kakuta Maimai Hamisi v Peris Pesi Tobiko, the court directed that the objection be heard with promptitude by way of written submissions on a tight timeline.

p. 2
02

Preservation of the suit land pending determination

Holding

A status quo order was granted preserving land parcel Nandi/Ndalat/Settlement/1081 in the defendant/respondent's name, restrained from disposal, pending the preliminary objection and the suit

Reasoning

The court invoked Article 159(2)(b) and (e), Practice Direction No. 32 of the ELC Practice Directions 2014, sections 3 and 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act 2015, and sections 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act to hold it had power to grant interim preservation orders to meet the ends of justice. Despite the respondent's objection that no danger was demonstrated, the court preserved the subject matter of the suit.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A preliminary objection on points of law capable of disposing of a suit should be decided with promptitude
  • The court may grant status quo orders to preserve suit land in the interim to meet the ends of justice

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The preliminary objection to take precedence over the application and other issues in the suit, to be heard by way of written submissions
  2. 2.Defendant/respondent's counsel and plaintiffs/applicants' counsel to file and serve submissions within two (2) days from the date of the order and two (2) days upon service respectively
  3. 3.Status quo prevailing over the suit land to be maintained: the land to remain registered in the name of the defendant/respondent, who shall not sell, charge, lease, subdivide, transfer, alienate or otherwise dispose of it pending hearing and determination of the preliminary objection and the suit
  4. 4.Preliminary objection fixed for mention on 25th September 2025 to confirm compliance and for further directions
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 159(2)(b) and (e) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010; sections 3 and 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act 2015; sections 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21); Practice Direction No. 32 of the Environment and Land Court Practice Directions 2014

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mengich & 6 others v Nathan (Environment and Land Case E023 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 6118 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6118/eng@2025-09-16

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