[2020] KEELC 2359 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 2359 (KLR)

The court found that the dispute in ELC No. 245 of 2017 concerns the same parcel of land (Kisumu/Dago/566) and involves the same parties as in ELC No. 13 of 2015. The issue of ownership was conclusively determined in the earlier suit, where the court declared the 1st defendant as the absolute and indefeasible owner....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 2359 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Maurice Olwal Olwal; Defendant: Michael Otieno Wagude; Defendant: The Registrar Lands Kisumu
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 245 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
suit struck out as res-judicata and abuse of process
Judges
TM Olando
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Locus Standi, Ownership Disputes, Abuse of Process
Source Language
en
Land and Property Res Judicata Locus Standi Ownership Disputes Abuse of Process

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maurice Olwal Olwal

Plaintiff

Michael Otieno Wagude

Defendant

The Registrar Lands Kisumu

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the suit is res-judicata in light of the prior determination in ELC No. 13 of 2015.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff has locus standi to bring the present suit.
  3. 3 Whether the current suit constitutes an abuse of court process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the dispute in ELC No. 245 of 2017 concerns the same parcel of land (Kisumu/Dago/566) and involves the same parties as in ELC No. 13 of 2015. The issue of ownership was conclusively determined in the earlier suit, where the court declared the 1st defendant as the absolute and indefeasible owner. The court held that the issues raised in the present suit ought to have been raised in the previous proceedings. Consequently, the doctrine of res-judicata applies, barring the plaintiff from re-litigating the same issues. The court also found the suit to be an abuse of court process and lacking in locus standi, as the plaintiff was attempting to challenge a matter already...

Court Disposition

suit struck out as res-judicata and abuse of process

Orders

  • The suit is struck out as res-judicata and an abuse of court process.
  • Costs awarded to the defendant.