Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission v Namini & Yagan (Trading as Yanam Investment) & 2 others; County Government of Baringo & 3 others (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Case E003 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 883 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court refused to strike out an EACC suit reclaiming allegedly fraudulently acquired public land in Baringo, allowing the case to proceed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the plaint was fatally defective
Ground collapsed - the plaint is dated, signed and sets out the remedies sought; in any event such defects warrant leave to rectify, not striking out
The court perused the plaint and found it dated 18th March 2025 and signed by counsel, with remedies set out. Even assuming the defects, striking out would be a draconian order; the overriding objective under Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution favours allowing rectification. That ground collapsed.
Whether the suit is sub-judice
No particulars of any pending suit were provided; sub-judice not sustained
Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act requires a previously instituted suit between the same parties over the same matter. No such suit was pleaded in the defence or particularised to the court, so the plea could not be sustained and was dismissed.
Whether the suit offends the Penal Code and oath-statute provisions
Those provisions cannot support a preliminary objection as they require ascertainment of facts (identities of offenders)
Sections 104(b), 108 and 114 of the Penal Code and section 11 of the Oaths and Statutory Declarations Act criminalise false swearing and unauthorised acts. Applying them to a suit would require ascertaining facts, so they are not 'pure' points of law and cannot ground a preliminary objection.
Legal principles established
#- A preliminary objection raises a pure point of law argued on the assumption that the facts pleaded are correct and cannot be raised where facts must be ascertained or discretion exercised
- Unless the particulars of a pending suit are made known to the court, the plea of sub-judice cannot be sustained
- A defect such as an un-dated or un-signed plaint does not warrant striking out; Article 159(2)(d) favours rectification
Court orders
#- 1.The Defendants' Preliminary Objection dated 4th April 2025 is dismissed with costs to the Plaintiff
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over public land (not expressly stated in the ruling)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission v Namini & Yagan (Trading as Yanam Investment) & 2 others; County Government of Baringo & 3 others (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Case E003 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 883 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Eldama Ravine Environment and Land Court suit re land parcels Eldama Ravine 498/654 and 498/655 (number not stated in the judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/883/eng@2026-02-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.