Salford Investments Limited v Waterfront Outlets Limited & 4 others; Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (Intended Defendant) (Environment and Land Case 1569 of 2016) [2025] KEELC 5972 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court let a property owner add the anti-corruption watchdog to its land case, but only as an interested party, not as a defendant.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the court should join the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission as the 6th defendant
- 2.Whether the court should grant leave to amend the plaint dated December 15, 2016
Key legal issues
#Whether the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission should be joined as a defendant or an interested party
The Commission is joined as an interested party only, not as the 6th defendant, because the plaintiff has no direct claim against it
The court noted that joinder under Order 1 Rule 10(2) is discretionary and the applicant bears the burden of showing it deserves joinder. The plaintiff's apprehension is that the subdivided portion may be forfeited by the anti-corruption court, but no direct correlation was established linking the plaintiff and the Commission. The Commission itself conceded joinder only as an interested party given its limited stake tied to the outcome of ACEC E024 of 2022.
Whether leave to amend the plaint should be granted
Leave to amend is granted but limited to including the Commission as an interested party and nothing else
Since the court declined joinder as a defendant and accepted the Commission as an interested party, the consequential amendment to the plaint was allowed only to reflect that limited capacity. The amendment was said to be in good faith and aimed at a just and effectual determination of the issues, and hearing had not yet taken off.
Legal principles established
#- The decision as to who to sue is essentially that of the plaintiff; the court's duty is to consider allegations against named defendants and give directions under Order 1 rule 10(2) regarding parties improperly or omitted joinder
Court orders
#- 1.The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission is joined in the proceedings as an interested party
- 2.The plaint is to be amended to reflect the Commission's joinder as an interested party only
- 3.Costs of the application to be in the cause
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B, 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 1 Rule 10(2), Order 8 Rule 2 and Order 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Relief refused
#Joinder of the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission as the 6th defendant
The applicant has no direct claim against the Commission; its participation would only be meaningful as an interested party
Costs
Costs to be in the cause
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The Ethics and Anti- Corruption Commission is hereby joined in these proceedings as an interested party and the amended plaint to refiect only that. Costs to be in the cause.
The decision to join a party to any proceeding is discretionary and such discretion ought to be exercised judiciously so as not to defeat justice to a deserving party.
the plaintifi/applicant has no direct claim against the intended 6th defendant/respondent which it can derive relief from
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Salford Investments Limited v Waterfront Outlets Limited & 4 others; Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (Intended Defendant) (Environment and Land Case 1569 of 2016) [2025] KEELC 5972 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Notice of motion dated 22nd April, 2024 in HCCC ( plaint dated December 15, 2016). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5972/eng@2025-09-02
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.