Oyuko & 2 others v Onyando (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E032 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2782 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court moved a Bondo land case to Siaya because the magistrate would have to review a colleague's earlier judgment on the same land.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the application dated 3/11/2025 seeking transfer of Bondo MCELC E036 of 2024 from Bondo Law Courts to the Environment and Land Court, Siaya has merit
- 2.Whether there is any justification to transfer the matter from Bondo Law Courts for hearing and determination by the ELC
Key legal issues
#Whether the transfer application was justified despite the trial court's apparent jurisdiction over the dispute
The application was allowed because part of the plaintiff's intended evidence was the prior judgment in MCELC E032 of 2023, creating discomfort for the CM court in reviewing that piece of evidence.
The court found the suit competent before the CM Court at Bondo and rejected the contention that the prior ex parte judgment on the same land barred the magistrate from entertaining the ownership dispute, which remained subject to res judicata. However, the plaintiff intended to rely on the earlier judgment as evidence, and the reply to the defence to the counter-claim alluded to its finality. This created discomfort for the CM court in reviewing that specific piece of evidence, justifying transfer to the ELC, Siaya.
Whether allegations that the earlier suit was secretly prosecuted ex parte warranted transfer
Such allegations were not a proper basis for the transfer application and had to be pursued in the underlying proceedings or on appeal.
The court observed that while the applicants alleged the judgment in E032 of 2023 was secretly obtained, that complaint was outside the scope of a transfer application. Proper remedies lay in an application within those proceedings or an appeal to the High Court. The transfer was therefore granted on the evidence-comfort ground, not on the bias or secrecy allegations.
Legal principles established
#- The High Court (and a court of equal status such as the ELC) may transfer a suit pending in a subordinate court directly to another competent subordinate court without first withdrawing it to itself.
- The fact that a court previously delivered a judgment concerning the same land does not deprive that court of jurisdiction over a different dispute on the same property; such dispute remains subject to res judicata.
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 3/11/2025 is allowed
- 2.ELC CASE NO E036 OF 2024 Simela Anyango Onyango v Zakayo Ayuko & Moses Ochieng Auma is transferred from Bondo Law Courts to the Environment and Land Court, Siaya for hearing and determination
- 3.Costs shall abide the outcome of the main hearing
- 4.The decision to transfer the matter shall not serve as a bar for any party to apply on the plea of res judicata
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 18 of the Civil Procedure Act
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
From the above the court need not withdraw a suit filed in the subordinate court to itself. The High Court can still transfer it to another subordinate court competent to hear it.
the fact that a judgement was delivered by a court in Bondo with regard to the same suit property does not mean that the trial court at Bondo cannot entertain a dispute on the same property but which will be subject to the doctrine of res judicata
The upshot of the foregoing is that the application dated is 3/11/2025 allowed and costs shall abide the outcome of the main hearing.
The decision to transfer the matter shall not serve as bar for any party to apply on the plea of res judicata.
Issues in the judgment
#The suit number is inconsistently rendered as both E036 of 2024 and E036 of 2025 in the supporting affidavit narration.
The court refers to the earlier judgment as Bondo MC ELC Case No. E032 of 2024 in one passage, whereas it is elsewhere cited as E032 of 2023.
The judgment cites the subject parcels inconsistently, referring in one place to South Sakwa/Barkowino/1408 alongside South Sakwa/Barkowino/9706 & 9707.
The respondent's rank for Hon. J.P. Nandi is inconsistently given as SPM in the application and SRM in the replying affidavit.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Oyuko & 2 others v Onyando (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E032 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2782 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELC Case No. E036 of 2024 (Transfer Application dated 3/11/2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2782/eng@2026-05-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.