AC Africane Holdings Ltd v Lamuria Properties Ltd & another (Environment and Land Petition E002 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 3592 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court struck out a tenant's constitutional petition, confirming that ordinary landlord-tenant lease disputes must be fought in civil courts, not through Articles 40 and 50.
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 petition is sub judice to Nanyuki CM ELC No. 73 of 2025 pending before the Magistrate's Court
- 2.Whether the petition improperly seeks to constitutionalise an ordinary landlord-tenant dispute and discloses no genuine constitutional question
- 3.Whether the petitioner's multiplicity of suits and applications amounts to abuse of court process
- 4.Whether the Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 22.5.2026 is merited
Key legal issues
#Sub judice and jurisdiction
The petition is barred by the sub-judice rule as its subject matter is directly and substantially in issue in Nanyuki CM ELC 73 of 2025 between the same parties.
Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act bars a court from trying a matter directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties. The lease dispute is active before the Magistrate's Court, and the petitioner never raised a jurisdictional challenge there. Absent an appeal or review, this court could not take over the dispute, as doing so would convert it into a court of first instance contrary to the judicial hierarchy.
Multiplicity and abuse of court process
The petitioner's filing of multiple suits and applications at different court levels amounts to abuse of the process of the court.
The petitioner had filed similar applications in the Magistrate's Court (7.5.2026 and 19.5.2026) seeking stay of distress, a miscellaneous suit E009 of 2025 seeking stay and leave to appeal, and the present petition with yet another application. Following Kivanga Estates and the Law Society of Kenya case, pursuing the same matter through parallel processes is a gamble on the judicial process and constitutes abuse of court process.
Constitutional threshold
Not every assertion of a right to property under Article 40 belongs in a constitutional petition; ordinary lease disputes belong in the civil courts.
Following Abdallah Mangi Mohamed as cited in Anne Wawuda, where a statutory mechanism exists for resolving a property dispute it should be used rather than clogging the constitutional court. The dispute here concerns a lease and nothing more, so no genuine constitutional question is disclosed.
Legal principles established
#- A preliminary objection consists of a point of law which may dispose of the suit
- The sub-judice rule prevents multiplicity of suits between the same parties over the same subject matter
- Where a statutory mechanism exists for resolving a property dispute, that procedure should be used rather than constitutional petitions
- A superior court cannot take over a dispute already pending before a court of competent jurisdiction absent appeal or review
Court orders
#- 1.The entire petition is struck out
- 2.Costs of the petition awarded to the respondents
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Constitution of Kenya, Articles 40 and 50(1) invoked by petitioner; court exercised its constitutional jurisdiction on a preliminary objection
Relief refused
#Declaration that deployment of auctioneers while a civil suit is pending violates Articles 40 and 50
The petition does not disclose a genuine constitutional question; the dispute is an ordinary lease dispute pending before the Magistrate's Court
Permanent injunction restraining interference with quiet possession
Sub judice and abuse of process; proper channel is appeal or review
Damages for trespass, commercial disruption and constitutional violations
No constitutional issue disclosed; statutory mechanisms exist for the property dispute
Costs
Costs of the petition to the respondents
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.
Thus the entire petition is hereby struck out with costs to the respondents.
The proper channel to challenge the orders given by the Magistrate’s Court is through Appeal or Review.
The improper practice of making all private disputes as to ownership of property as applications for enforcement of constitutional rights to property should be discouraged.
Pursuing two processes at the same time constituted and amounted to abuse of court and/or legal process
It is not disputed that the protagonists have a land lord tenant relationship of which their dispute has spilled over before the magistrates court in the ongoing case Nanyuki CM ELC 73 OF 2025.
Issues in the judgment
#Date of petitioner's application inconsistently recorded as 7th May 2026 and 7.54.2026
Widespread typographical errors (e.g. 'fiagrant', 'eficacious', 'afiends') suggesting OCR defects
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "AC Africane Holdings Ltd v Lamuria Properties Ltd & another (Environment and Land Petition E002 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 3592 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Petition dated 19.5.2026 (Nanyuki ELC). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3592/eng@2026-06-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.