Kibet & 4 others v Cheboi & 9 others (Environment and Land Case E006 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3092 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed that registered societies can join lawsuits as interested parties, even without filed returns.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether Lembus Council of Elders, an unincorporated entity registered under the Societies Act, has capacity to be joined as an Interested Party
- 2.Whether the Applicants have satisfied the threshold for being joined as Interested Parties in this case
- 3.Whether paragraphs 21 to 29 of the supporting affidavit should be struck out as scandalous, irrelevant and oppressive
Key legal issues
#Capacity of an unincorporated registered society to be joined as an Interested Party
The Applicant, registered under the Societies Act with certificate No. 25243, has capacity to be enjoined; failure to file returns or tender its constitution has no bearing on that capacity.
The court held that the certificate of registration and a letter of authorisation by the Chairman were sufficient. The authority of Forthall Bakery Supply Company cited by the 1st to 4th Defendants did not persuade the court that the society lacked capacity. Non-filing of returns was immaterial to capacity to sue, be sued or be enjoined.
Whether the Applicants demonstrated a sufficient stake and interest to be joined
The Applicants are long-standing residents, former civil servants and a former Councillor with knowledge of the road reserve; their interest was demonstrated with supporting documents and is not that of a busy body.
Applying the Muruatetu elements, the court found the Applicants' interest clearly identifiable and proximate: they are residents of Eldama Ravine Township, some worked in relevant government departments, and one sat in meetings approving the 20-metre road. Their good-faith involvement assists complete adjudication under Order 1 Rule 10(2).
Whether paragraphs 21 to 29 of the supporting affidavit should be struck out
No case was made for striking out; the Memorandum of Understanding is a public document reflecting support for protecting public property.
The court found no wild allegations in the impugned paragraphs. If the 1st Defendant had no relationship with the Governor, he could have sworn an affidavit to that effect. The MoU signed by the Governor demonstrates support for protecting the environment and public property, which is the thrust of the suit.
Legal principles established
#- Courts have a wide discretion, even on their own motion, to enjoin an Interested Party where participation will assist determination of the dispute
- An unincorporated society registered under the Societies Act has capacity to be enjoined as an Interested Party, and non-filing of returns does not affect that capacity
Court orders
#- 1.The Applicant be enjoined in these proceedings as Interested Party
- 2.The Applicant shall have 21 days from the date of the ruling to file and serve their pleadings on all the other parties
- 3.The other parties, if need be, will have 14 days from service of the Interested Party's pleadings and documents to file and serve their responses
- 4.The suit shall be mentioned on 28th July 2026 for further directions
- 5.Costs shall be in the cause
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 1 Rule 10(2) and Order 51 Rule 7(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules; Sections 1A and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act
Relief refused
#Punitive costs against Joseph Leboo, Joseph Tyong'ik and Philip Sura with an order for taxation
A party should not be penalised with costs in public interest litigation
Striking out paragraphs 21 to 29 of the Applicants' supporting affidavit
No wild or scandalous allegations were made; the Memorandum of Understanding is a public document reflecting no ill motive
Costs
Costs shall be in the cause
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.
The Applicant be enjoined in these proceedings as Interested party.
They shall have 21 days from the date of this ruling to file and serve their pleadings on all the other parties.
Courts therefore have a wide discretion, even on their own motion, to enjoin a party as an Interested Party in any proceedings if their participation will assist in the determination of the dispute at hand.
It is my finding, therefore, that the Applicant has the capacity to be enjoined in these proceedings and the same cannot be besmirched as the 1st to 4th Defendants have attempted to.
A party should not be penalised with costs in a public interest litigation and it is in the interest of justice that the motion be allowed.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal inconsistency in the Nakuru CMC case number - referred to as E056 of 2005 in one passage and E1056 of 2025 in others
Signature date of the ruling (22nd May 2026) post-dates the mention date fixed for 28th July 2026 but the mention follows the suit timeline; more notably the affidavit dates and mention dates are internally consistent but the ruling is dated later than filings dated December 2025, which is plausible - however the referenced prior ruling date (25th September 2025) precedes the suit's own litigation timeline only marginally
The 6th and 9th Defendants' joint defence appears to plead in a manner mirroring the claim against them (denial followed by what reads like an admission of the plaintiffs' allegations), an apparent drafting contradiction in the judgment's recitation
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kibet & 4 others v Cheboi & 9 others (Environment and Land Case E006 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3092 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Notice of Motion dated 28th October 2025 in a suit by plaint dated 16th April 2025 (Eldama Ravine Township Block L/233-237 and un-surveyed plots B and C). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3092/eng@2026-05-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.