Bundi v Kiriinya (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E001 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 4532 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court struck out an adverse possession claim because the land was public, unregistered county land already decided in earlier cases.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Res judicata
The suit is res judicata because ownership of the same plots was determined with finality by the Chief Magistrate's Court (CMELC E001 of 2024) and this court on appeal (ELC Appeal E020 of 2025), and the plaintiff derives his rights from his father who was a party to the former suits.
The lower court dismissed the father's ownership claim and the ELC appeal was likewise dismissed. Both determinations were on the merits, by competent courts, and in rem, binding the suit property. The plaintiff concedes he derives his claim from his father. Allowing him to litigate afresh would defeat finality and enable a second bite at the cherry under the guise of adverse possession.
Adverse possession over public and unregistered land
The claim for adverse possession fails because the suit plot is public land vested in the County Government of Isiolo, not alienated by any letter of allotment, and no certificate of title or lease exists.
Section 41(a)(v) of the Limitation of Actions Act excludes land vested in a county council (now county government) from acquisition of title by limitation. The prior decisions found the plots to be public land under the county government's custody. Adverse possession also requires registered land; here no title exists, so the statutory 12-year computation cannot arise.
Cause of action and abuse of process
The originating summons discloses no reasonable cause of action and constitutes an abuse of the due process of the court, being a disguised attempt to appeal against this court's own judgment in ELC Appeal E020 of 2025.
Adverse possession cannot be asserted against a person adjudged not to be the owner. The plaintiff, actuated by ulterior motives, seeks to circumvent the judgment in the prior appeal. Citing Muchanga Investments, knowingly using legal process for an ulterior purpose constitutes abuse of process warranting striking out.
Legal principles established
#- All elements of res judicata must be satisfied conjunctively for the plea to succeed
- Adverse possession cannot be claimed against public land, whether national or county government land
- A claim for adverse possession applies only to registered land
- A party cannot re-agitate a cause of action already determined in rem by courts of competent jurisdiction, even through a successor in interest
Court orders
#- 1.The Preliminary Objection dated the 05.05.2026 be and is hereby Allowed
- 2.The Plaintiff's suit vide Originating Summons dated the 09.04.2026 be and is hereby struck out
- 3.Costs of the Preliminary Objection and the suit shall be borne by the Plaintiff
- 4.The costs shall be agreed upon and in default be taxed in the conventional manner
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over the Originating Summons and the Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 05.05.2026
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Bundi v Kiriinya (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E001 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 4532 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Originating Summons dated 09.04.2026 (Isiolo Environment and Land Court). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4532/eng@2026-07-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.