Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck OutPetition E045 of 2025 (Environment and Land Court)· [2026] KEELC 214 (KLR)

Gigiri Development Limited v Warrawee Gigiri Property Limited & 2 others (Environment and Planning Petition E045 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 214 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
21 January 2026
MKMOHAMMED N. KULLOW
1,746 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court struck out a Gigiri property petition because an earlier suit between the same parties over the same land was already pending.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi (Mohammed N. Kullow, J) determined a notice of preliminary objection dated 29th November 2025 filed by the 1st respondent in a petition concerning LR No 91/453 Gigiri Road. The petitioner had sought conservatory orders restraining the 1st respondent from further construction, excavation, alteration or development, alleging an illegal and unapproved development in a controlled low-density residential zone, defiance of stop orders issued by Nairobi City County and NEMA, misuse of a NEMA licence not pertaining to the project, and violation of the rights to a clean and healthy environment and fair administrative action. The 1st respondent objected that the court lacked jurisdiction, that the petition was sub judice given a pending petition, ELCEP E040 of 2025, between the same parties over the same subject matter, and that the petition was frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process. The petitioner countered that parties and issues differed between the two suits and that, if there was overlap, consolidation rather than striking out was the proper remedy. Applying section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act and the principles in Republic v. Kihara Kariuki ex parte LSK, Nyanza Garage and the KNCHR Supreme Court decision, the court found the subject matter and parties substantially the same, held that the 3rd respondent should have been joined in the earlier suit, and concluded the petition was sub judice and an abuse of process. The preliminary objection was upheld, the petition struck out, with no orders as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the petition is sub judice given the pending ELCEP E040 of 2025

Holding

Yes - the subject matter is the same, the parties are effectively the same (the 3rd respondent could have been joined in the earlier suit), so the later petition must yield to the earlier suit

Reasoning

The court applied section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act and the principles in the Law Society of Kenya ex parte case and the KNCHR Supreme Court decision. A comparison of the two petitions showed the same subject property and overlapping issues on statutory approvals and the enforcement notice. Filing a fresh petition instead of seeking joinder was an abuse of process and a recipe for confusion.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • For the sub judice doctrine to apply there must be two or more suits; the matter in issue must be directly and substantially the same; the parties must be the same or claim under them; and the suits must be pending in a court with jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Petition struck out as sub judice
  2. 2.No orders as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Original constitutional and environmental jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court; sub judice objection under section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Gigiri Development Limited v Warrawee Gigiri Property Limited & 2 others (Environment and Planning Petition E045 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 214 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Petition E045 of 2025 (Environment and Land Court). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/214/eng@2026-01-21

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