Admass Ventures Limited & 2 others v Saif Properties Limited (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E342 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3162 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed it can handle land arbitration disputes, but a party filing late lost protection—filing in the wrong court doesn't freeze deadlines.
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 Notices of Preliminary Objection dated 16th January 2026 and 3rd February 2026 are merited
Key legal issues
#Whether the Environment and Land Court has jurisdiction to entertain applications for recognition and enforcement of, and setting aside, arbitral awards arising from land/environment disputes
The ELC has jurisdiction; the respondent's preliminary objection on jurisdiction failed
The Arbitration Act came into force when the High Court was the only superior court. Under Article 162(2)(b) and the Environment and Land Court Act, the ELC was established with status equal to the High Court and vested with jurisdiction over environment and land disputes, which includes arbitration proceedings arising from such disputes. The respondent's objection that only the High Court under Article 165 could entertain such applications therefore failed.
Whether the respondent's application dated 16th January 2026 to set aside the arbitral award is time-barred under Section 35(3) of the Arbitration Act
The application is time-barred and statute-barred; the preliminary objection on time fails and the respondent's application is allowed
Section 35(3) requires an application to set aside an award to be made within three months of receipt of the award or disposal of a section 34 request. The award was issued on 12th February 2025 and the application was filed on 16th January 2026, about 11 months later. The prior filing in the High Court, which was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, did not stop time from running. However, the court disposed of the matter by allowing the respondent's application rather than striking it out.
Legal principles established
#- Filing a suit or application in the wrong forum does not stop time from running for limitation purposes
- Limitation goes to the jurisdiction of the court; a statute-barred matter cannot be entertained
- The Environment and Land Court, being of equal status with the High Court, has jurisdiction to determine arbitration proceedings arising out of land and environment disputes
Court orders
#- 1.The Preliminary Objection dated 16th January 2026 is merited and the same is hereby allowed.
- 2.The preliminary objection dated 3rd February 2026 lacks merit and the respondent's notice of motion application dated 16th January 2026 is hereby allowed as prayed.
- 3.Each party shall bear the its own costs.
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution of Kenya and the Environment and Land Court Act
Relief refused
#Applicants' preliminary objection dated 3rd February 2026 seeking striking out of the respondent's application dated 16th January 2026 for want of jurisdiction (time bar under Section 35(3))
The court found the objection lacked merit; the respondent's application was allowed as prayed instead
Costs
Each party shall bear the its own costs.
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 Preliminary Objection dated 16th January 2026 is merited and the same is hereby allowed.
The preliminary objection dated 3rd February 2026 lacks merit and the respondent's notice of motion application dated 16th January 2026 is hereby allowed as prayed.
Each party shall bear the its own costs.
Jurisdiction is everything; without it, a court has no power to make one more step.
filing a suit in the wrong forum does not stop time from running of time for limitation purposes
Issues in the judgment
#Internal inconsistency in the date of the arbitral award - it is elsewhere stated as 12th February 2025
The applicant's preliminary objection is referred to with inconsistent dates (3rd February 2026 vs 3rd February 2023)
The respondent's preliminary objection is referred to with inconsistent dates (16th January 2026 vs 16th February 2026)
Grammatical error in the costs order
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Admass Ventures Limited & 2 others v Saif Properties Limited (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E342 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3162 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3162/eng@2026-04-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.