[2022] KEELC 15431 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 15431 (KLR)

The court found that the claims in the plaint, specifically refund of deposits, general damages for breach of agreement, and reimbursement of monies, do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court as defined by Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and Section 13(2)(a) of the Environment and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELC 15431 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Eunice Wambui Ndiang’ui; Defendant: Pinnacle Developers Limited; Defendant: NCBA Bank Limited
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kajiado
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case E008 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction; parties directed to file the appeal at the High Court.
Judges
MN Gicheru
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Court, Stay of Execution, Appeals Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of Court Stay of Execution Appeals 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eunice Wambui Ndiang’ui

Plaintiff

Pinnacle Developers Limited

Defendant

NCBA Bank Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the Environment and Land Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the application for stay of execution relating to claims not involving land.
  2. 2 Whether the orders sought in the plaint fall within the jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claims in the plaint, specifically refund of deposits, general damages for breach of agreement, and reimbursement of monies, do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court as defined by Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and Section 13(2)(a) of the Environment and Land Court Act. Since the dispute did not concern the environment, use, occupation, or title to land, the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal or grant the orders sought. The proper forum for such claims is the High Court, not the Environment and Land Court. Accordingly, the court directed that the appeal be filed at the High Court and declined to entertain the...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction; parties directed to file the appeal at the High Court.

Orders

  • The Environment and Land Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.
  • The appeal to be filed at the High Court.