Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissednot_stated_in_judgment· [2026] KEELC 3587 (KLR)

Asego Holdings Ltd & another v Commercial International Bank Kenya (Formerly Mayfair Bank Limited) & 4 others; Okundi (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit E591 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3587 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
11 June 2026
MKMohammed N. Kullow
1,890 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed it can hear cases challenging bank charges over land, because what matters is the land dispute, not the loan.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The 1st and 2nd Defendants raised a Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 9th December 2025, contending that the Environment and Land Court lacked jurisdiction because the suit was premised on banking matters and the use of land as collateral, matters said to fall within the unlimited original jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 165(3)(a) of the Constitution. They relied on Cooperative Bank of Kenya Limited v Patrick Kangethe Njuguna, arguing that the plaintiff was challenging the validity of a charge and the exercise of statutory power of sale. The 3rd Defendant supported the objection. The Plaintiff opposed, arguing that the cause of action was anchored on land - alleged forgery of charge instruments, unlawful registration of charges, exercise of statutory power of sale and consequent transfer of LR Nairobi/Block 15/613 - and that the reliefs sought cancellation of fraudulent instruments rather than recovery of a debt. The Plaintiff also invoked Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Co. Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd on the threshold for preliminary objections. Kullow J held that the objection was a pure point of law capable of disposing of the suit, but applying the predominant purpose test from Suzane Butler v Redhill Investors, found that the substratum of the claim was the validity of the charge instruments and title to land, squarely within the Court's jurisdiction under Article 162(2)(b) and Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act. The preliminary objection was dismissed with costs to abide the determination of the main suit.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the ELC has jurisdiction over a suit challenging the validity of charge instruments, their registration, the exercise of statutory power of sale and the consequent transfer of land

Holding

The objection was dismissed; the substratum of the plaintiff's case is the validity of charges over land LR Nairobi/Block 15/613 and falls squarely within the ELC's jurisdiction under Article 162(2)(b) and Section 13 of the ELC Act.

Reasoning

Although the defendants argued, citing Cooperative Bank of Kenya v Patrick Kangethe Njuguna, that challenges to a charge and statutory power of sale belong to the High Court, the court applied the predominant purpose test from Suzane Butler v Redhill Investors. The pleadings and reliefs sought — declarations that the charges and transfer are null and void, cancellation of registrations, restoration of title and possession, and injunctions — all concern title to and interests in land. The plaintiff did not seek recovery of any debt, so the dispute is a land dispute rather than a commercial one, and the ELC has jurisdiction.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a transaction involves both land and commercial elements, jurisdiction between the ELC and the High Court is determined by the predominant purpose of the transaction.
  • A preliminary objection must be a pure point of law, argued on the assumption that all facts pleaded by the other side are correct.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 9th December 2025 lacks merit and is hereby dismissed
  2. 2.Costs to abide the determination of the main suit
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Asego Holdings Ltd & another v Commercial International Bank Kenya (Formerly Mayfair Bank Limited) & 4 others; Okundi (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit E591 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3587 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). not_stated_in_judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3587/eng@2026-06-11

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.