Tormoi v Koros & 3 others (Land Case E020 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 4185 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court struck out a fresh land claim because the same dispute had already been fully decided between the same parties.
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 preliminary objection dated 10th June 2026, premised on res judicata under Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act, is sustainable
- 2.Whether the suit is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the process of the court and thus due for striking out under Order 2 Rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Key legal issues
#Whether the suit is res judicata under Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act
Yes. The parties, cause of action and subject matter were directly and substantially in issue and finally determined in prior proceedings between the same parties, including the Court of Appeal decision in Civil Appeal No. 36 of 2016 which awarded the plaintiff 0.3 acres in Nandi/Chepterwai/858
The court set out the Section 7 test and the IEBC ingredients, compared the previous decisions (ELC 571 of 2012, Civil Appeal No. 36 of 2016, and Civil Application No. E012 of 2022) with the present plaint, and found the same parties and cause of action before a competent court. The prior Court of Appeal judgment had already determined the entitlement of the parties, so relitigating ownership of 14 acres was barred. The plaintiff's attempt to fill a supposed lacuna was precisely the kind of pleading draftsmanship John Florence warns against.
Whether the suit is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process warranting striking out under Order 2 Rule 15
Yes; a res judicata suit is an abuse of the court process and must be struck out in limine
Relying on Susan Jane Shah vs Cooperative Merchant Bank Ltd (SCOK) and ET vs Attorney General, the court held that res judicata is a matter of substantive law, and Article 159(2)(d) notwithstanding, a barred suit cannot be relitigated. Continuing the suit would waste judicial time and prejudice the defendants, so the entire plaint was struck out with costs to the defendants.
Legal principles established
#- A preliminary objection must consist of a pure point of law pleaded or arising by clear implication from the pleadings, capable of disposing of the suit in its entirety
- Where a suit is res judicata, the court should strike it out at the outset to prevent abuse of the court process
- Litigation must come to an end and courts must be vigilant against pleadings drafted to evade res judicata
Court orders
#- 1.The defendants' preliminary objection dated 10th June 2026 is allowed
- 2.The entire suit originated by the plaint dated 8th May 2026 is struck out
- 3.Costs of the preliminary objection to be borne by the plaintiff
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Environment and Land Court jurisdiction under the Environment and Land Court Act over disputes relating to land; the ruling also invokes Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 and Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 21
Relief refused
#All reliefs sought in the plaint (declaration of ownership of 14 acres in eight suit parcels, permanent injunction, mesne profits, costs)
The suit was struck out as res judicata, the matters having been determined in prior proceedings including Environment and Land Case No. 571 of 2012, Civil Application No. E012 of 2022 and Civil Appeal No. 36 of 2016/2018
Costs
Costs of the preliminary objection to be borne by the plaintiff, by dint of the proviso to section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, guided by Rai and others vs Rai and others (2014) eKLR
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.
A fortiori, the defendants' preliminary objection dated 10th June 2026, be and is hereby allowed accordingly and this entire suit originated by the plaint dated 8 th May 2026, is struck out.
By dint of the proviso to section 27 (1) of the CPA and being guided by the Supreme Court of Kenya decision in the case of Rai and others vs Rai and others (2014) eKLR alongside the obtaining circumstances, costs of the preliminary objection be borne by the plaintiff.
It is trite law that a preliminary objection must contain a pure point (s) of law duly pleaded or which arise by clear implication of pleadings and if argued, has power to dispose of the suit in entirety
In the present suit, there are same parties and cause of action as well as competent court determined the instant matter in previous decisions as stated in the preliminary objection
No court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, in a court competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, and has been heard and finally decided by such court.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment refers inconsistently to the prior Court of Appeal matter: the preliminary objection grounds and submissions cite Eldoret Civil Appeal No. 36 of 2018, but paragraph 19 refers to 'Civil Appeal No. 36 of 2016'
The ruling states the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Civil Appeal No. 36 was delivered on 21st June 2022, while Eldoret Civil Application No. E012 of 2022 ruling is stated as delivered on 9th May 2025, which is internally odd given the application number of 2022
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Tormoi v Koros & 3 others (Land Case E020 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 4185 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Kapsabet ELCLC No. E020 of 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4185/eng@2026-07-08
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.