Murage v Murage & another (Environment and Land Case E020 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5331 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court cannot decide who inherits family land; such disputes must go to the High Court's succession division.
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 Environment and Land Court has jurisdiction over a claim seeking a share and cancellation of title to property forming part of a deceased person's estate
Key legal issues
#Whether the ELC has jurisdiction over distribution of a deceased person's estate
It does not; succession disputes fall under section 47 of the Law of Succession Act, within the High Court's jurisdiction
The suit property was confirmed as absolutely owned by the 1st Defendant under a confirmed grant. The Plaintiff's claim for a share and cancellation of title is in substance a dispute over distribution of the estate. Under section 47 of the Law of Succession Act, only the High Court handles such disputes; the ELC's jurisdiction is limited by its establishing statute, per Republic v Karisa Chengo.
The proper avenue for the Plaintiff
To seek revocation of the confirmed grant to enable redistribution
The beneficiaries themselves consented to the estate being confirmed absolutely in the 1st Defendant's name contrary to section 71(2) of the Law of Succession Act, which requires confirmation to specify all beneficiaries and shares. The remedy lies in the succession court, not the ELC.
Legal principles established
#- Specialized courts' jurisdictions are limited to matters provided for in their establishing statutes
- A court without jurisdiction must down tools at once
- Redistribution of a deceased's estate confirmed in an administrator's name requires revocation of the confirmed grant in the succession court
Court orders
#- 1.The suit is struck out for want of jurisdiction
- 2.No order as to 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 and the Environment and Land Court Act (section 13 invoked by counsel); court found it lacked jurisdiction over succession matters under section 47 of the Law of Succession Act
Relief refused
#Declaration of entitlement to 1/3 share of LR. Thegenge/Ihithe/244 and cancellation/subdivision of title
Court lacked jurisdiction; matter is a succession dispute reserved for the High Court under the Law of Succession Act
Costs of the suit borne by the defendants
No order as to costs was made
Costs
No order as to costs - each party to bear their 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.
Consequently, the current suit is hereby struck out for want of jurisdiction.
No order as to costs
Jurisdiction is everything. Without it, a court has no power to make one more step.
their jurisdictions are limited to the matters provided for in those statutes.
Issues in the judgment
#Judgment header shows the suit was heard on 16 April 2026 and judgment delivered 12 August 2026, dates after the plaint of 23 June 2025, which is internally consistent, but the page footer numbering 'ELC NO. E020 OF 2025' conflicts with the case number stated in the record only if the plaint were 2025; no material contradiction found
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Murage v Murage & another (Environment and Land Case E020 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5331 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELC NO. E020 OF 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5331/eng@2026-08-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.