https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4570

Njoroge (Suing as the Administratrix of the Estate of Peter Njoroge Muriu - Deceased) v Kanyotu & another (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit E435 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 4570 (KLR) (15 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELC 4570 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi Environment and Land Case Civil Suit E435 of 2025 MN Kullow, J July 15, 2026 Between Beatrice Njeri Njoroge (Suing as the Administratrix of the Estate of Peter Njoroge Muriu - Deceased) Plaintiff and Willy Kihara Njoki Kanyotu 1st Defendant Hon Attorney General 2nd Defendant Ruling 1.The matter is coming up for the determination of the notice of motion application dated 1st September 2025 which seeks the following ordersa.Spentb.Spentc.That this court do grant temporary stay of execution pending hearing and determination of the suit. 2.The application was premised on grounds that 1st Respondent would proceed to dispose off the suit property if not restrained causing irreparable harm to the applicants and further defeat the course of justice. 3.The notice of preliminary objection was dispensed off by way of written submissions. 1st defendant’s submissions 4.Counsel submitted that the issue raised was one touching on jurisdiction and it was capable of dispensing off the suit property pointing out that it rightfully captured what a preliminary objection was as in Mukisa Biscuits Manufacturing Company Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd [1969] EA 69 5.He reiterated that the court lacked territorial jurisdiction. 6.In the plaintiff’s submission dated 21st January 2026 counsel reiterated the ground of objection that the suit was in Nairobi county evidenced by paying of rates to Nairobi City County. Analysis and determination 7.Having considered the Preliminary objection and the submissions herein the only issue for determination is whether the Notices of Preliminary Objection dated 30th September 2025 is merited .The threshold of a preliminary objection was set out by the Court of Appeal in the case of Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Co. Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd (1969) EA 696 as follows:“...a preliminary objection consists of a pure point of law which has been pleaded, or which arises by clear implication out of pleadings, and which if argued as a preliminary objection may dispose of the suit. “The Court went further to note that:-“A preliminary objection is in the nature of what used to be a demurrer. It raises a pure point of law which is argued on the assumption that all the facts pleaded by the other side are correct. It cannot be raised if any fact has to be ascertained or if what is sought is the exercise of judicial discretion. The improper raising of preliminary objections does nothing but unnecessarily increase costs and, on occasion, confuse the issues, and this improper practice should stop.’’The preliminary objection in this matter is founded on the notion that the court lacks territorial jurisdiction. It goes without saying that without the requisite jurisdiction a court of law down sits tools meaning that the objection, if successful, is capable of finally disposing the whole matter. The objection, therefore, attains the threshold of a pure preliminary point of law.A quick reading of the plaint as contained in paragraph 5 would inform the court that the search was conducted at the Nairobi registry which makes it within Nairobi County. Even if the suit property was not within Nairobi County, in my view, an issue of territorial jurisdiction is easy to deal with simply by transferring the file to the relevant jurisdiction. The same cannot dispose of this suit. Final disposition 8.The upshot of the above is that the notice of preliminary objection dated 30th September 2025 thus fails.The cost will be in the cause.It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL AT NAIROBI ON THIS 15TH DAY OF JULY 2026.MOHAMMED N. KULLOWJUDGE