Ndiga v Said & another (Land Case E018 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 747 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed that land claims based on trust are not time-barred, and dismissed an attempt to block such a suit.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the preliminary objection was properly raised as a pure point of law
The objection was properly raised because the issues of limitation and jurisdiction are points of law not dependent on ascertaining disputed facts.
The Plaintiff argued the objection failed the Mukisa Biscuits threshold because determining when the right to sue accrued required examination of facts, including whether a spouse could sue while still married. The court disagreed, holding that the accrual date did not require factual ascertainment since dates had been pleaded, and the grounds raised were purely questions of law.
Whether the Plaintiff's suit is time barred under section 7 of the Limitation of Actions Act
The suit is not time barred because the Plaintiff pleads a constructive/implied trust, and section 20 of the Act exempts actions by beneficiaries under a trust from limitation periods.
The 1st Defendant contended time ran from registration of the suit property in her name on 26/5/1999, lapsing in 2011. The Plaintiff, relying on the Siaya decree that the property was not matrimonial property but could be claimed in another forum, sought a declaration that she holds the title in trust. Since the Plaintiff pleads constructive/implied trust, section 20 of the Limitation of Actions Act exempts such actions from limitation, as affirmed in Kabogo v Gitau.
Whether the court lacks pecuniary jurisdiction over the suit
The Environment and Land Court has unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction; neither Article 162(2) of the Constitution, sections 3 and 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act, nor section 101 of the Land Registration Act imposes a monetary ceiling.
The 1st Defendant argued the property was valued below Kshs. 8,000,000 and therefore outside the court's pecuniary competence. The court traced its jurisdiction to Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act, which confer jurisdiction over land and environment disputes without any pecuniary limit, and noted section 101 of the Land Registration Act likewise imposes none.
Legal principles established
#- A preliminary objection is properly raised where it is a pure point of law pleaded or arising clearly from the pleadings, with no facts requiring ascertainment.
- Claims by a beneficiary under a trust, including claims pleading constructive or implied trust, are exempt from the periods of limitation under the Limitation of Actions Act.
- The Environment and Land Court's jurisdiction is not limited in pecuniary terms.
Court orders
#- 1.The preliminary objection dated 26/08/2024 is dismissed for lack of merit
- 2.Costs shall abide the outcome of the main suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 read together with section 3 of the Environment and Land Court Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ndiga v Said & another (Land Case E018 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 747 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/747/eng@2026-02-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.