Stephen Kipkorir Kerich & another v David Kiprono Langat & 3 others [2015] KEELC 89 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A registered landowner won eviction of squatters but got only token damages because he proved no financial loss.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Ownership and right of exclusive possession of registered land
The plaintiffs, as registered proprietors, were entitled to exclusive possession and to have the unjustified defendants removed
The plaintiffs produced a title deed and official search showing registration in 1994. The defendants, though served, entered no appearance or defence, so the evidence of encroachment from 2007 was uncontroverted. Section 25 of the Land Registration Act vests the proprietor's rights free from all other interests and claims, subject only to encumbrances noted on the register, so the defendants had no tenable basis to remain.
Damages for trespass
Trespass was established but only nominal (token) damages of Kshs. 25,000/= were awarded for lack of evidence of loss
Although the defendants were clearly trespassers, the plaintiffs led little or no evidence quantifying the loss suffered from the encroachment. The court therefore could not make a proper assessment of damages and awarded a token sum in recognition of the infringement of the plaintiffs' property rights, coupled with the grant of eviction and costs.
Legal principles established
#- A registered proprietor's rights under Section 25 of the Land Registration Act confer exclusive possession free from all other interests and claims not noted on the register, entitling the owner to evict unjustified occupants
Court orders
#- 1.Defendants ordered to vacate the suit property Kericho/Chemagel/3070 within 14 days of service of the judgment or decree
- 2.In default of vacating, an eviction order to issue
- 3.Token damages of Kshs. 25,000/= awarded to the plaintiffs for trespass
- 4.Plaintiffs awarded the costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over disputes relating to land (Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution); suit commenced by plaint
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Stephen Kipkorir Kerich & another v David Kiprono Langat & 3 others [2015] KEELC 89 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Environment & Land Case No. 15 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2015/89/eng@2015-11-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.