Gachunga (Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Joseph Gachunga Mwangi) v Muthecha (Sued as the Administrator of the Estate of Geoffrey Muthecha Gitau) (Environment and Land Case E072 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 735 (KLR)

The court accepted that sections 4(1) and 4(2) would ordinarily bar a contractual claim filed over thirty-one years after accrual. However, the applicant does not seek to enforce the 1993 contract but asserts a constructive trust based on joint contributions of the parties' deceased fathers to the purchase of the suit property, coupled with particularised allegations of fraud against the respondent's deceased father. Section 20(1) preserves such trust/fraud claims from limitation, and per Kabogo v Gitau, once trust and fraud are pleaded the issue must proceed to full hearing.

While limitation and jurisdiction are questions of law capable of threshold determination, the applicant's pleaded case rests on constructive trust and particularised acts of fraud. Whether a trust existed, the measure of contributions, and the existence and effect of fraud are factual matters requiring a full hearing with tested evidence. Upholding the objection would adjudicate facts without a record and defeat rights expressly preserved by section 20(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act.