SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Rafiki Limited v Moscone; Nativi & another (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Appeal E025 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 4373 (KLR) (4 June 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KEELC 4373 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
4373
Citation
[2025] KEELC 4373 (KLR)
Decided
4 June 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeEnvironment and Land AppealPostureAppeal from a ruling by Honorable James Ong’ondo, Senior Principal MagistrateCoramEK MAKORI
Holding

The appeals are dismissed against the appellants, and they are not parties to the contracts and leases that form the Respondents' cause of action.

Facts

The appeals concern a ruling by Honorable James Ong’ondo, Senior Principal Magistrate, in Malindi Chief Magistrate’s Environment and Land Case Nos. 236 and 237 of 2022. The appeals involve four parties: Rafiki Limited, Maria Grazia Moscone, Massimo Nativi, and Daniele Lo Coco.

Issues

  1. The learned magistrate misconstrued the proviso to Section 3(3)(b) of the Law of Contract Act.
  2. The learned magistrate failed to recognize that the appellants were neither the vendors nor the lessors under the agreement and the lease.
  3. The learned magistrate erred in law and fact by enlarging and purporting to amend Section 3(3) of the Law of Contract Act to include the payment and receipt of consideration as a third element necessary for a suit based on a contract for the disposition

Reasoning

The court reaffirmed that the learned magistrate erred in law and fact by misconstruing the proviso to Section 3(3)(b) of the Law of Contract Act and by enlarging and purporting to amend Section 3(3) of the Law of Contract Act.

Outcome

Appeals dismissed

Authorities cited

Cases cited (4)
  • Okeno v Republic [1972] EA 32
  • Pandya v. R., [1957] E. A. 336
  • Shantilal M. Ruwala v. R., [1957] E.A. 570
  • Peters v. Sunday Post, [1958] E. A. 424
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case