Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedHCCC (consolidated: CMCC No. 14181 of 2006; HCCC No. 6 of 2007; HC Misc. Application No. 652 of 2009) - main suit· [2015] KEELC 582 (KLR)

Florence Mbai T/A Fountain of Life Children's Home & another v City Council of Nairobi [2015] KEELC 582 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
24 March 2015
8,740 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~35 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Nairobi's City Council unlawfully demolished a church and children's home without proper notice, and the High Court ordered it to pay Kshs 8.5 million plus costs.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Plaintiffs, a registered church fellowship and children's home operating at Pumwani, Nairobi on plots 'E' and 'F' (LR Nos. 209/14213 and 209/14329) allocated by letters of allotment dated 28th October 1997, sued the City Council of Nairobi for demolishing their structures on 19th/20th December 2006 without notice. They claimed special damages of Kshs 19,179,150/=, exemplary and punitive damages for violation of the rights of 60 minors, and a permanent injunction over the plots. Three consolidated suits were heard together. The Defendant asserted that the structures were unapproved and unauthorised, that enforcement notices were served, and that the demolition was sanctioned by an order in City Court Criminal Case No. 1967 of 2006. The court held that no enforcement notice was properly issued or served on the Plaintiffs: the notices were addressed to a differently named entity and different parcels, no notice covered LR 209/14329, and the criminal court order bore no land reference number and did not concern the Plaintiffs. The demolition was therefore illegal. Judgment was entered for the Plaintiffs with special damages of Kshs 8,000,000/= (based on their balance sheet with appreciation), exemplary and punitive damages of Kshs 500,000/= for the arbitrary night demolition disregarding the children's welfare, and costs. The claims for the minors' upkeep failed for want of evidence, and the permanent injunction was refused because a letter of allotment is not title and third parties may have acquired interests over the land.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the demolition of the Plaintiffs' structures was lawful

Holding

The demolition was unlawful - no valid enforcement notice was issued or served on the Plaintiffs, no notice covered LR 209/14329, and the criminal case court order did not reference the Plaintiffs or the parcel

Reasoning

The court examined the enforcement notices and found they were addressed to a differently named entity and to different parcel numbers, with no notice covering LR 209/14329. There was no proof that Mohamed Rashid was the owner, occupier or developer of LR 209/14213. The City Court order lacked a land reference number and was not directed at the Plaintiffs. Service and due process under section 38 of the Physical Planning Act therefore failed.

p. 11
02

Entitlement to special damages

Holding

Special damages awarded at Kshs 8,000,000/= instead of the Kshs 19,179,150/= claimed

Reasoning

Special damages must be pleaded and strictly proved. Although the Plaintiffs could not produce receipts because documents were destroyed in the demolition, the court accepted the explanation and relied on the balance sheet showing net assets of Kshs 6,400,564.45 as at 31st March 2006, allowing appreciation to the date of filing to arrive at Kshs 8,000,000/=.

p. 12
03

Whether exemplary and punitive damages were warranted

Holding

Awarded at Kshs 500,000/= for arbitrary and high-handed action

Reasoning

Applying Obongo v Municipal Council of Kisumu, the court found the demolition was carried out at night without notice and without regard to the welfare of children housed in the structures, constituting oppressive, arbitrary action by servants of a government entity, which is a proper case for exemplary damages.

p. 13
04

Whether a permanent injunction could issue over the suit parcels

Holding

Refused - the Plaintiffs held only letters of allotment, not title

Reasoning

The letters of allotment related to unsurveyed plots 'E' and 'F'. Following Dr. Joseph Arap Ng'ok and Wreck Motors Enterprises, a letter of allotment is merely an offer to treat; issued title is supreme. With no evidence of title and third parties apparently having built on the land, an injunction could not issue.

p. 13

Legal principles established

#
  • A local authority demolishing unauthorised developments must strictly comply with the enforcement notice procedure under section 38 of the Physical Planning Act; demolition without valid notice and service is unlawful
  • Special damages must be both pleaded and strictly proved
  • Exemplary and punitive damages are available for oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional action by servants of government
  • A letter of allotment is not a title but an offer to treat

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Defendant shall forthwith pay the Plaintiff special damages of Kshs 8,000,000/= with interest at court rates from the date of filing of the suit until payment in full
  2. 2.The Defendant shall forthwith pay the Plaintiff exemplary and punitive damages of Kshs 500,000/= with interest at court rates from the date of judgment until payment in full
  3. 3.The Defendant shall meet the costs of the suit

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Children Actsections 7, 8, 9, 13, 19, 22
  • Physical Planning Actsections 3, 13, 29, 30(1), 30(3), 38(1)-(4), 39, 39(2)
  • Local Government Act (repealed)

Cases cited (11)

  • Neno Evangelism Centre thro' its Registered Trustee vs. Director of City Planning & 3 others
    (2012) eKLR
  • Harrison Mwangi Nyota vs. Naivasha Municipal Council
    (2006) eKLR
  • Arkey Industries vs. Samson Ngutu Nyongi
    (2007) eKLR
  • Coast Bus Service Limited vs. Murunga & others
    Nairobi CA No. 192 of 1992 (ur)
  • Kampala City Council vs. Nakaye
    (1972) EA 446
  • Hahn vs. Singh
    (1985) eKLR
  • Ouma vs. Nairobi City Council
    (1976) KLR 375
  • Ratcliffe v Evans
    (1892) 2 QB 524
  • Obongo & Another -vs- Municipal Council of Kisumu
    (1971) EA 96
  • Dr. Joseph Arap Ng'ok vs. Justice Moijo Ole Keiwua & others
    (1997) eKLR
  • Wreck Motors Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Lands & others
    (1997) eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the High Court; claims transferred from the subordinate court pursuant to an order in Misc. Application No. 652 of 2009 and consolidated with the instant suit

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Florence Mbai T/A Fountain of Life Children's Home & another v City Council of Nairobi [2015] KEELC 582 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). HCCC (consolidated: CMCC No. 14181 of 2006; HCCC No. 6 of 2007; HC Misc. Application No. 652 of 2009) - main suit. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2015/582/eng@2015-03-24

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.