Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck OutELC CASE NO. E325 OF 2026· [2026] KEELC 4960 (KLR)

Nkaabu v Kenya Commercial Bank Limited & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E325 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 4960 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
27 July 2026
CNC. K. Nzili
1,483 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court cannot hear disputes about mortgage charge documents, so a landowner's fraud claim over a Kshs. 23 million charge was struck out.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff moved the Environment and Land Court in Nairobi by a plaint dated 15 July 2026 seeking a declaration that a charge registered over Title No. NAIROBI/BLOCK 102/172 in favour of the 1st Defendant was fraudulently and illegally procured and is null and void, cancellation of the charge by the Land Registrar, a permanent injunction against sale, and general and exemplary damages. He alleged the charge was based on forged documents he never signed, that he held the original title, and that the property was slated for public auction on 7 August 2026 over a default of Kshs. 23,260,047.92 to the 2nd Defendant, with whom he had no relationship. By application dated 15 July 2026 he sought interim injunctive relief, disclosure of the credit facility documents, and an order that DCI Ruai expedite its investigations. None of the defendants appeared despite service. The court directed counsel to address jurisdiction. Applying the Court of Appeal's line of authority beginning with Cooperative Bank of Kenya Ltd v Patrick Kangethe Njuguna, the court held that a charge is a disposition of land, not a 'use' of land, and that the predominant issue in the suit was the propriety of the charge documents, which falls outside the ELC's jurisdiction. The suit was struck out for lack of jurisdiction with no orders as to costs, meaning the threatened auction was not restrained by this court.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction of the ELC over disputes on charge instruments

Holding

The predominant issue is the propriety of the charge documents, which does not fall within the court's jurisdiction

Reasoning

Applying the Court of Appeal's decisions in Cooperative Bank v Kangethe and related authorities, the court distinguished between 'use' of land (surface, airspace, subsoil) and security interests created over land. Since the plaintiff's complaint targets a charge allegedly procured by forgery, the dispute concerns a disposition of land and loan/security arrangements, not use of land, so the ELC lacks jurisdiction.

p. 9

Legal principles established

#
  • A charge is a disposition in land rather than a 'use' of land, and a claim based on it falls outside the ELC mandate
  • The ELC has jurisdiction only over disputes connected to the 'use' of land, excluding contracts incidental thereto such as charges and mortgages

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Suit by way of plaint dated 15.7.2026 struck out for lack of jurisdiction
  2. 2.No orders as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution as read with Section 13(2)(a) and (d) of the ELC Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Nkaabu v Kenya Commercial Bank Limited & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E325 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 4960 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELC CASE NO. E325 OF 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4960/eng@2026-07-27

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