Universal Resources International Limited v Director of Mines & 6 others (Environment and Land Petition E009 of 2025) (Environment and Land) [2026] KEELC 74 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court dismissed a mining company's bid to stop rival prospecting because its licence expired in 2012 and was never renewed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Petitioner has legal capacity to institute the Petition absent a filed board resolution
The objection fails; it is sufficient for the deponent to depose to authority, and the burden shifts to the disputing party to prove lack of authority, which was not done.
The court followed Leo Investments Ltd v Trident Insurance and Republic v Registrar General, and the Court of Appeal's decision in Spire Bank, holding that Order 4 rule 1(4) was not intended to be used as a procedural technicality to strike out suits. It was not disputed that Mark Lloyd Stephenson is a director, and the petition is yet to be set down for hearing, so the objection could not succeed.
Whether the further affidavit sworn 20th October 2025 should be struck out
Struck out as incurably defective for non-compliance with the Oaths and Statutory Declarations Act.
The affidavit did not indicate the place where it was taken or before whom, and did not show attestation by a Notary Public. The court held these defects touch a point of law, are not mere technicalities, and cannot be cured by Article 159 of the Constitution, so the affidavit was inadmissible and was expunged.
Whether the Petitioner established a case for conservatory orders
No. The exclusive prospecting licence EPL/843 (PL/2018/0195) was issued 8th December 2011 for one year, expired 7th December 2012, was never renewed, and conferred no enforceable rights; additionally the Petitioner breached licence terms by prospecting for minerals outside those licensed.
Applying the principles in Gatirau Peter Munya and related authorities, the court examined the documents and found the licence had lapsed long before the Mining Act 2016 came into force. The Petitioner also surveyed for manganese, iron ore and copper contrary to section 20 of the repealed Cap 306. Without a valid licence there was no substratum to preserve, so no prima facie case existed and the application was dismissed.
Legal principles established
#- A board resolution authorizing institution of a suit by a company may be filed at any time before the suit is fixed for hearing; its absence is not fatal to the suit, and a disputing party must demonstrate lack of authority with evidence.
- An affidavit sworn outside Kenya that does not indicate the place it was taken or before whom it was taken, or proof of attestation by a Notary Public, breaches the Oaths and Statutory Declarations Act and is incurably defective; the defect cannot be cured by Article 159 of the Constitution.
- Conservatory orders preserve the status quo and the substratum of a petition, and require demonstration of a prima facie case with a likelihood of success, prejudice in their absence, enhancement of constitutional values, and public interest considerations.
Court orders
#- 1.The further affidavit sworn by Mark Lloyd Stephenson on 20th October 2025 is struck out as incurably defective.
- 2.The application dated 5th August 2025 is dismissed with costs.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Constitution of Kenya, 2010 - Articles 2, 3, 10, 20, 21, 22, 23, 27, 40, 47, 73(2) and 260 invoked in the petition
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Universal Resources International Limited v Director of Mines & 6 others (Environment and Land Petition E009 of 2025) (Environment and Land) [2026] KEELC 74 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Petition (application dated 5th August 2025) - number not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/74/eng@2026-01-14
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.