Agrafin Management Services Limited v Agricultural Finance Corporation & 4 others (Environment and Land Case 496 of 2017) [2026] KEELC 844 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court struck out a 24-year-old land lawsuit because disputes about charges and mortgage enforcement belong in the High Court.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Environment and Land Court has jurisdiction over a dispute pegged on the existence, validity and enforcement of a charge
The Court lacks jurisdiction; the dominant issue is the charge, a commercial and contractual dispute reserved for the High Court, not a dispute over use, occupation of, or title to land.
Relying on Co-operative Bank of Kenya Limited v Patrick Kangethe Njuguna, the Court held that the determining factor is the dominant issue in dispute. Whether a charge existed, was validly created or enforceable is a substantive determination touching contractual and commercial relations. The sale, transfer and registration all flowed from an alleged statutory power of sale dependent on the charge. Ascertainment of the charge's existence lies outside the ELC's constitutional and statutory mandate under Article 162(2)(b) and Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act.
Whether the Court can interrogate the sale, transfer or title without first determining the charge
No. The sale, transfer and registration were pleaded by all parties as flowing from an exercise of statutory power of sale, whose existence and crystallization depend entirely on the charge.
The Court found the dispute wholly pegged on the charge, not merely incidental to it. It could not determine the reliefs sought without resolving the charge questions first, and undertaking that inquiry would exceed its mandate. Accordingly, having found lack of jurisdiction, the Court declined to make any findings on the merits.
Legal principles established
#- The dominant-issue test determines jurisdiction between the High Court and the Environment and Land Court: disputes relating to mortgages, charges, banking securities and their enforcement fall within the civil jurisdiction of the High Court even though such instruments relate to land.
Court orders
#- 1.The Court downed its tools upon finding it lacks jurisdiction to entertain and determine the dispute.
- 2.The Plaint dated 8th February 2000 and the Further Amended Plaint dated 18th March 2024 were struck out in their entirety for want of jurisdiction.
- 3.Each party shall bear its own costs.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Agrafin Management Services Limited v Agricultural Finance Corporation & 4 others (Environment and Land Case 496 of 2017) [2026] KEELC 844 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in judgment (Plaint dated 8th February 2000; Further Amended Plaint dated 18th March 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/844/eng@2026-02-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.