Case ID:181667

Edwin K. Njagi t/a E.K. Njagi & Co. Advocates v Fig Tree Hotel Limited & 3 others [2021] eKLR

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Civil Suit 1511 of 2016

Parties:

Edwin K. Njagi t/a E K Njagi & Co Advocates v Fig Tree Hotel Limited, Lucy Waithira Mwangi, John Irungu Githinji & Julius Kariuki Mwangi

Date Delivered:

09 Sep 2021

Case Class:

Civil

Court:

Environment and Land Court at Nairobi

Case Action:

Ruling

Judge(s):

Antonina Kossy Bor

Citation:

Edwin K. Njagi t/a E.K. Njagi & Co. Advocates v Fig Tree Hotel Limited & 3 others [2021] eKLR

Court Division:

Environment and Land

County:

Nairobi

Disclaimer:

The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT

AT NAIROBI

ELC CIVIL SUIT NO. 1511 OF 2016

EDWIN K. NJAGI T/A

E.K. NJAGI & CO. ADVOCATES...................................PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

FIG TREE HOTEL LIMITED...............................1

ST

DEFENDANT

LUCY WAITHIRA MWANGI...............................2

ND

DEFENDANT

JOHN IRUNGU GITHINJI.....................................3

RD

DEFENDANT

JULIUS KARIUKI MWANGI.................................4

TH

DEFENDANT

RULING

The 2

nd

, 3

rd

and 4

th

Defendants instructed the Plaintiff who is an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya to act for them in a dispute relating to the running of the 1

st

Defendant and its shareholding. The Plaintiff filed Nairobi HCC No. 454 of 2008 in line with those instructions. A consent was recorded vide which the dispute was referred to arbitration. After the final arbitral award was made, the 2

nd

, 3

rd

and 4

th

Defendants terminated the Plaintiff’s services following which the Plaintiff filed a bill of costs, which was taxed at Kshs. 32,447,332/= on 14/6/2010.

The Plaintiff filed this suit on 2/12/2016 and averred that he had established that the 1

st

Defendant was at an advanced stage of disposing of the property known as Fig Tree Hotel erected on land reference number (L.R. No.) 209/9510 (Original Number 209/1803/4) Ngara, Nairobi County (“the Suit Property”). He averred that the 2

nd

, 3

rd

and 4

th

Defendants’ shares in the 1

st

Defendant were their only known assets. He claimed that he had a lien to the 2

nd

, 3

rd

and 4

th

Defendants’ shares in the Suit Property since the instructions the 2

nd

, 3

rd

and 4

th

Defendants gave to him related to their shareholding in the 1

st

Defendant. Further, that if the 2

nd

, 3

rd

and 4

th

Defendants’ shares of proceeds from the sale of the Suit Property were released to them he would lose whatever entitlement to lien that he may enjoy in the Suit Property.

The Plaintiff seeks a declaration that he is entitled to a lien over the 2

nd

, 3

rd

and 4

th

Defendants’ shares in the 1

st

Defendant and that he is entitled to their shares in L.R. No. 209/9510. Further, he seeks a permanent injunction to restrain the 1

st

Defendant or its agents from releasing to the 2

nd

, 3

rd

and 4

th

Defendants their share of the sale proceeds from the Suit Property together with costs of the suit and interest.

The suit was heard on 14/6/2021. Plaintiff and the Defendant each called one witness. The court directed parties to file submissions. When the court retired to write its judgement, it noted that the Plaintiff’s claim does not relate to ownership of land or title to land.

The Plaintiff’s claim is based on a lien over the 2

nd

, 3

rd

and 4

th

Defendants shares in the suit land. The claim for lien does not fall within the jurisdiction of this court. In the interest of justice, this suit will be transferred to the High Court Civil Division for hearing and determination.

Delivered virtually at Nairobi this 9

th

day of September 2021.

K. BOR

JUDGE

In the presence of: -

Mr. V. Owuor- Court Assistant

No appearance for the Plaintiff and the Defendant