Kariuki & 2 others (Suing for and on behalf of Njumbi Road Residents Association) v Nairobi City County Government & 6 others
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court dismissed Njumbi Road residents' challenge to high-rise developments because they should have used statutory planning and environmental forums first.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Competence of the preliminary objections
The objections on locus standi, sub judice, res judicata and exhaustion were properly raised as preliminary objections since they required no ascertainment of contested facts
The court applied the Mukisa Biscuit test as restated in Hassan Ali Joho, holding that locus standi is jurisdictional and properly raised preliminarily; res judicata and sub judice pleas could be resolved on the pleadings and decisions already before the court; and the exhaustion inquiry is a legal evaluation of the forum invoked versus the forum prescribed by statute.
Locus standi of the Petitioners as association officials
Standing established; objection failed. Articles 22(2)(b), 22(2)(d), 258(2) and 260 permit association and representative standing; absence of a membership list not fatal at the threshold
The court was satisfied the Association legally existed as an unincorporated body, having exhibited its Constitution, rules and notice of registered office. Requiring a membership list as a condition precedent would unduly restrict the broad representative standing contemplated by the Constitution, and standing could also rest on public-interest litigation.
Sub judice
Objection moot; judgment has since been delivered in Nairobi ELCEPA E001 of 2026 so those proceedings are no longer pending
Sub judice requires previously instituted proceedings still pending. Although the Petition was filed while the appeal was pending, judgment has since been delivered, so the objection was overtaken by events.
Res judicata
Objection failed; no subsisting merits determination on ZFRC's EIA licence exists to anchor the plea, and parties are not identical
The Tribunal's judgment of 31st October 2025 was set aside in its entirety on review and substituted with dismissal for want of jurisdiction; the ELC appeal (Wabwoto J) upheld that review without determining the merits of the licence. Further, the County Government and MYC Solutions were not parties to the previous proceedings, so res judicata could at best relate to the licence challenge only.
Exhaustion of remedies
Objection succeeded; environmental/licensing grievances are res judicata-barred and planning grievances must go to the County Physical and Land Use Planning Liaison Committee, now operational
Having challenged the EIA licence at the Tribunal and on appeal and lost on limitation/jurisdictional grounds, the Petitioners cannot relitigate the same licensing grievances through constitutional language. Zoning, change of user and development-permission complaints fall under section 78 PLUPA before the Liaison Committee, which was suspended in November 2024 but restored on 30th July 2026. The court also noted the change of user occurred in 2024 when the Committee existed, and the Petitioners did not rebut the averment that no objection was lodged to the notices.
Threshold for conservatory orders
Not reached; the Petition was dismissed on the preliminary objection before this issue fell for determination
Having allowed the 4th Respondent's preliminary objection, the court dismissed the Petition and Motion, rendering the conservatory-order threshold question academic.
Legal principles established
#- A preliminary objection must raise pure points of law, cannot require ascertainment of contested facts or exercise of judicial discretion, and must be capable of disposing of the suit
- Res judicata and sub judice may properly be raised by way of preliminary objection where determination does not require ascertaining contested facts
- Lack of a membership list or express written authority does not defeat constitutional representative standing under Articles 22(2) and 258(2)
- A party who pursued a statutory remedy out of time and lost on jurisdictional grounds cannot restart the same dispute as a constitutional petition; doing so defeats limitation periods and encourages forum shopping
- Where a statutory forum for planning disputes is operational, it should determine development-permission disputes in the first instance, subject to appeal
Court orders
#- 1.The 4th Respondent's Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 10th May, 2026 is allowed
- 2.The Petition dated 24th April, 2026 and the Notice of Motion dated 24th April, 2026 are dismissed
- 3.Each party shall bear its own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 22, 70 and 258 of the Constitution as read with Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act (invoked by Petitioners); court determined preliminary objections on its jurisdiction
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kariuki & 2 others (Suing for and on behalf of Njumbi Road Residents Association) v Nairobi City County Government & 6 others", Case Analysis (2026). Environment and Planning Petition E017 of 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5617/eng@2026-09-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.