Kariuki v Kariuki & 3 others (Environment and Land Case E162 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2531 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court dismissed a request to review its ruling, confirming that commercial disputes about loans and shares belong outside land courts.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicant met the threshold for review under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules
The applicant failed to demonstrate a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record; the ruling of 13th November 2025 contained no substantial error of law warranting review.
The court restated the grounds for review: discovery of new and important matter, error apparent on the face of the record, or other sufficient reason, all made without undue delay. Relying on National Bank of Kenya v Ndungu Njau and Republic v Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal Ex parte Apollo Mboya, the court held the error must be self-evident and not require elaborate argument. The alleged error (reliance on the original plaint instead of the amended plaint) was not patent, and the applicant had not brought the amendment to the court's attention during the preliminary objection submissions. The claim remained commercial, outside the court's jurisdiction.
Effect of the amended plaint dated 17th June 2025 filed without leave of court
The amended plaint, filed after the preliminary objection and without leave, had no operative effect until the applicant moved the court accordingly; it could not found an error in the ruling.
The preliminary objection had challenged the plaint dated 17th March 2025, and the applicant did not, in submissions, bring the amendment to the court's attention. The applicant also did not seek leave to amend. The court therefore agreed with the respondents that the amendment was filed to defeat the objection and remained ineffective in the case tracking system. The critical facts of the claim remained unchanged, so the ruling's jurisdictional analysis was unaffected.
Legal principles established
#- An amended plaint filed without leave of the court lies in the case tracking system with no effect until the party moves the court accordingly.
- Review is not an appeal in disguise; it lies only for a patent, self-evident error on the face of the record.
- Claims of fraudulent loans, charges, changes of shareholding and related commercial matters are not disputes involving title to land under Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution.
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion dated 26th November, 2025 is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the 1st to 3rd defendants/respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B, 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 45 Rule 1 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules; review jurisdiction under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kariuki v Kariuki & 3 others (Environment and Land Case E162 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2531 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2531/eng@2026-05-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.