Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherNot stated in judgment· [2025] KEELC 8602 (KLR)

Thuo v Rambiti Farm Saw Mill Limited & another (Environment and Land Case E010 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 8602 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
10 December 2025
1,370 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The 1st defendant raised a preliminary objection dated 1st July 2025 contending that, as the suit property is situated in Tana River County, the ELC at Mombasa lacked territorial jurisdiction under section 12 of the Civil Procedure Act. The plaintiff opposed, arguing that the property's records are at the Mombasa Lands Registry, the defendant's registered offices are in Mombasa, the defendant had acknowledged jurisdiction by filing a defence, and that the objection was an inordinate procedural technicality; alternatively, the plaintiff sought transfer to ELC Malindi rather than striking out. Applying the Mukisa Biscuits test, S. M. Kibunja, J held that the undisputed location of the suit property (CR. 77010, Karuwa area, Tana River County) made the objection a pure point of law. The court found the plaintiff's claim to thirty percent ownership of the property fell outside the proviso to section 12 permitting suit where the defendant resides or carries on business, so neither the location of the Lands Registry nor the defendant's offices was determinative. Equating section 12 to a procedural technicality was held misplaced, as the provision is statutory, not rules-based. Choosing transfer over striking out as just, fair and cost effective, the court ordered the suit transferred to ELC Malindi and directed the plaintiff to pay the 1st defendant's costs of the preliminary objection, since the objection arose from the plaintiff filing in the wrong court.

Key legal issues

#
01

Location of the suit property

Holding

The suit property, CR. 77010 within Karuwa area, Tana River County, is undisputedly situated in Tana River County.

Reasoning

The court examined paragraphs 4 and 5 of the amended plaint describing the property and noted the 1st defendant's statement of defence did not dispute the location. The undisputed factual position made the objection a pure point of law under the Mukisa Biscuits test.

p. 2
02

Territorial jurisdiction under section 12 of the Civil Procedure Act

Holding

The Mombasa court lacks territorial jurisdiction since the property is in Tana River County and the claim falls outside the proviso permitting suit where the defendant resides or carries on business.

Reasoning

The plaintiff's claim to thirty percent ownership of the suit property falls under section 12 suits concerning rights in immovable property, not within the proviso for relief obtainable through personal obedience. Hence neither the location of the Mombasa Lands Registry nor the defendant's registered offices matters; the suit should have been filed where the property lies.

p. 3
03

Whether the suit should be struck out or transferred

Holding

The suit is transferred to ELC Malindi rather than struck out, with costs to the 1st defendant.

Reasoning

Weighing the superior court decisions on striking out versus transfer, the court found transfer to the court with territorial jurisdiction just, fair and cost effective. Since the objection arose from the plaintiff filing in the wrong court, the plaintiff bears the 1st defendant's costs under section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Suits relating to immovable property shall be instituted in the court within whose local limits the property is situate, save where the proviso to section 12 applies.
  • A preliminary objection on territorial jurisdiction based on undisputed location of suit property is a pure point of law.
  • The registry where the records of a suit property are kept is not a determinant of territorial jurisdiction.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.That this suit is hereby transferred to ELC Malindi for hearing and determination.
  2. 2.The plaintiff to meet the 1st defendant's costs in the preliminary objection.
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 12 of the Civil Procedure Act (Chapter 21, Laws of Kenya)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Thuo v Rambiti Farm Saw Mill Limited & another (Environment and Land Case E010 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 8602 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/8602/eng@2025-12-10

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