[2020] KEELC 1366 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 1366 (KLR)

The court found that the dispute did not fall within the scope of Sections 13, 15, 16, or 17 of the Kenya Railways Corporation Act, and thus Section 83(1) did not oust its jurisdiction. However, the court determined that the cause of action arose on 13th May 2016, when the Plaintiff became aware of the drainage and access issues following compulsory acquisition. Since the suit was filed more than twelve months after this date, it was statute barred under Section 87(b) of the Act. Additionally, the 2nd Defendant was sued as an agent of a disclosed principal, and under established legal principles, such an agent cannot be sued where the principal is known. Consequently, the suit against...

Citation
[2020] KEELC 1366 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Satellite Aviation Telecommunications Systems Limited; Defendant: Kenya Railways Corporation; Defendant: China Road and Bridge Corporation (K)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
18 September 2020
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 63 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Application to Strike Out Suit
Outcome
suit struck out as statute barred and for misjoinder of agent; costs to defendants
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition, Statute Barred Actions, Jurisdiction of Court, Agency Principle, Injunctions, Drainage and Access Rights
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Compulsory Acquisition Statute Barred Actions Jurisdiction of Court Agency Principle Injunctions Drainage and Access Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Satellite Aviation Telecommunications Systems Limited

Plaintiff

Kenya Railways Corporation

Defendant

China Road and Bridge Corporation (K)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Application to Strike Out Suit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit in light of Section 83 of the Kenya Railways Corporation Act.
  2. 2 Whether the suit is statute barred under Section 87(b) of the Kenya Railways Corporation Act.
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd Defendant, as an agent of a disclosed principal, is a proper party to the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the dispute did not fall within the scope of Sections 13, 15, 16, or 17 of the Kenya Railways Corporation Act, and thus Section 83(1) did not oust its jurisdiction. However, the court determined that the cause of action arose on 13th May 2016, when the Plaintiff became aware of the drainage and access issues following compulsory acquisition. Since the suit was filed more than twelve months after this date, it was statute barred under Section 87(b) of the Act. Additionally, the 2nd Defendant was sued as an agent of a disclosed principal, and under established legal principles, such an agent cannot be sued where the principal is known. Consequently, the suit against...

Court Disposition

suit struck out as statute barred and for misjoinder of agent; costs to defendants

Orders

  • The Plaint dated 7th June, 2019 is hereby struck out.
  • The Plaintiff to pay the Defendants the costs of the suit.