Golden Century Ltd v Sciborski

The bottom line

Kenya's Environment and Land Court ruled that a landowner's eviction suit can proceed even while related appeals between the same parties are pending elsewhere.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#

The Environment and Land Court at Nairobi (Kullow J) ruled on the Defendant's Preliminary Objection dated 18th September 2026, contending that the suit offended Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act because pending applications in Civil Appeals E368 of 2024 and E661 of 2024 between the same parties concerned the same subject matter. The Defendant argued that a determination here risked conflicting decisions with the Court of Appeal, relying on Wainaina v Waibara and the KNCHR case. The Plaintiff countered that a similar objection based on HCCOMM 298 of 2025 had already been dismissed, and that the appeals concerned enforcement of an arbitration award for breach of contract, while this suit seeks eviction of the Defendant as a trespasser - different causes of action over the same property. The court framed a single issue: whether the objection was merited. It reaffirmed that jurisdiction is everything, citing Owners of the Motor Vessel 'Lilian S'. It noted its ruling of 7th May 2026 had conclusively found that sub judice did not apply as between this suit and the High Court matter, since the matters in issue are totally different, and held that finding applied equally to the appeals arising from that matter. Adopting the Ex parte LSK test - whether a final decision in the earlier suit would operate as res judicata - the court dismissed the objection and awarded costs to the Plaintiff.

Key legal issues

#

01

Whether the suit is sub judice under Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act given pending appeals between the same parties

Holding

The objection fails because the causes of action and issues in issue differ; the appeals arise from HCCOMM 298 of 2025, whereas this suit seeks eviction for trespass

Reasoning

The court noted a prior ruling of 7th May 2026 which conclusively found that the doctrine of sub judice did not apply as between this suit and HCCOMM 298 of 2025. The pending appeals stem from that High Court matter and raise different issues (enforcement of an arbitration award) from this suit (eviction of a trespasser). The court adopted the test that sub judice applies only where the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in the earlier suit.

p. 3

02

Whether the objection constitutes a pure point of law on jurisdiction

Holding

Yes - if successful it would dispose of the whole suit, but it fails on the facts

Reasoning

The court reaffirmed that jurisdiction is everything and a court must first be satisfied it has jurisdiction before proceeding; jurisdiction is conferred by the Constitution or statute. A successful Section 6 objection would oust jurisdiction entirely, attaining the threshold of a pure preliminary point of law, but the court found the jurisdiction objection unsubstantiated because the matters in issue are not the same.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#

The test for the sub judice rule is whether a final decision in the previously instituted suit would operate as res judicata in the subsequent suit

Court orders

#

1.The Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 18th September 2026 is not merited and is hereby dismissed.
2.Costs be awarded to Plaintiff.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Related briefs

#

ELCDismissed2026-10-08

Stephen Otieno Owino, Joyce Nyakero and George Kimutai (Suing as the officials and members of Yasego Society) v Meron Limited & another

Kenya's Environment and Land Court dismissed a society's third attempt to stop eviction, ruling the matter was already decided and compensation claims remain open.

ELCDismissed2026-10-08

Carolyne Awino Aluoch & Another v Grace Anyango Owiti & Another

Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed it cannot extend the twelve-year deadline for land claims, dismissing buyers' bid to sue over a 2008 land sale.

ELCStruck Out2026-10-08

Ephrahim Otieno Mbadi (Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Musa Mbadi Philipo alias Musa Mbadi Bwodo – Deceased) v Margaret Achieng Odinga & 2 others

A Kenyan court ruled that an estate administrator who loses a lawsuit must pay the legal costs personally, but the winning side's attempt to seize his land was struck out for skipping required steps.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Golden Century Ltd v Sciborski", Case Analysis (2026). Land Case E315 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5657/eng@2026-09-24

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