Makokha v Omondi & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E169 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 1974 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court confirmed one estate co-administrator can sue to protect family land without the other co-administrator's consent.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the absence of a co-administrator's consent renders a suit by one personal representative fatally defective
No; the plaintiff as co-administrator was justified in filing the suit to protect the estate, and the application to strike out lacked merit
The court held that a plaintiff has the right to institute proceedings where aggrieved by another party's actions or inactions. Under Section 82 of the Law of Succession Act, personal representatives have a primary duty to protect the estate, and filing the suit was exactly that step. The 2nd defendant disclosed in her own deposition that both parties are joint administrators, so capacity existed; lack of consent did not defeat the suit.
Whether the ELC lacks jurisdiction over a dispute between joint administrators of an estate
The jurisdictional objection failed; the issues raised in the plaint concerning ownership of the suit property can only be determined by the ELC, as confirmed by the ruling in the succession cause
The 2nd defendant argued, relying on Christine Wangari Gachege and other authorities, that disputes among joint administrators fall to the court that issued the grant. The court rejected this, noting that Musyoka J in the succession cause had expressly contemplated litigation over the suit property in the ELC and postponed confirmation of the grant pending determination of that suit, confirming that ownership of the property is for this court.
Legal principles established
#- A co-administrator of a deceased's estate may institute proceedings to protect the estate without the consent of the other co-administrator, by virtue of the duties under Section 82 of the Law of Succession Act
- A suit is not entirely defeated merely because it was instituted without the consent of a co-administrator; the aggrieved plaintiff retains the right to access the court
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion dated 25th June, 2025 is dismissed
- 2.Costs in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Sections 79 and 82 of the Law of Succession Act (application); original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over the suit property dispute
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Makokha v Omondi & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E169 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 1974 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Milimani ELC No. E169 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/1974/eng@2026-04-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.