Adingo v Mudoga & another (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E027 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 141 (KLR)

The court noted that the subject matter in the CM's court suit and the two ELC suits is the same parcel of land, NANDI/SEREM/271, and that the applicant is a constant party across the trio of suits. Relying on the overriding objective under sections 3 and 19(2) of the Environment and Land Court Act and section 18(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, and on the parties' rights of access to justice and a fair hearing under Articles 48, 50(1), 25(c) and 159(2)(b) of the Constitution, the court held that the suits ought to be heard together without delay.

The respondents argued that subordinate courts have jurisdiction over land disputes within their pecuniary jurisdiction under section 9 of the Magistrates' Courts Act and that under section 18 of the Civil Procedure Act transfer can only move a suit from a court without jurisdiction to one with jurisdiction. The court did not accept these objections, compressing the issues to merit and the ends of justice, and found the transfer application cogent and meritorious given the identical subject matter and overlapping parties in the three suits.