Golden Century Ltd v Sciborski
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court ruled that a landowner's eviction suit can proceed even while related appeals between the same parties are pending elsewhere.
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 Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 18th September 2026 is merited
Key legal issues
#Whether the suit is sub judice under Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act given pending appeals between the same parties
The objection fails because the causes of action and issues in issue differ; the appeals arise from HCCOMM 298 of 2025, whereas this suit seeks eviction for trespass
The court noted a prior ruling of 7th May 2026 which conclusively found that the doctrine of sub judice did not apply as between this suit and HCCOMM 298 of 2025. The pending appeals stem from that High Court matter and raise different issues (enforcement of an arbitration award) from this suit (eviction of a trespasser). The court adopted the test that sub judice applies only where the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in the earlier suit.
Whether the objection constitutes a pure point of law on jurisdiction
Yes - if successful it would dispose of the whole suit, but it fails on the facts
The court reaffirmed that jurisdiction is everything and a court must first be satisfied it has jurisdiction before proceeding; jurisdiction is conferred by the Constitution or statute. A successful Section 6 objection would oust jurisdiction entirely, attaining the threshold of a pure preliminary point of law, but the court found the jurisdiction objection unsubstantiated because the matters in issue are not the same.
Legal principles established
#- The test for the sub judice rule is whether a final decision in the previously instituted suit would operate as res judicata in the subsequent suit
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 18th September 2026 is not merited and is hereby dismissed.
- 2.Costs be awarded to Plaintiff.
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Environment and Land Court jurisdiction; objection based on Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21) - sub judice
Relief refused
#Defendant's request that the suit be stayed/dismissed as sub judice under Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act
The issues in this suit differ from those in the pending appeals arising from HCCOMM 298 of 2025; a conclusive finding on sub judice had already been made on 7th May 2026
Costs
Costs be awarded to Plaintiff.
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.
That the Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 18th September 2026 is not merited and is hereby dismissed.
Costs be awarded to Plaintiff.
From the above analysis however, there can be no doubt that the matters in issue are totally different.
The test for applicability of the sub judice rule is whether on a final decision being reached in the previously instituted suit, such decision would operate as res-judicata in the subsequent suit.
Issues in the judgment
#Court's paraphrase of the Ex parte LSK passage includes 'a resounding yes' though it dismissed the objection
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Golden Century Ltd v Sciborski", Case Analysis (2026). Land Case E315 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5657/eng@2026-09-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.