John Kiguru Karume v Kenya Institute of Administration & 4 others [2017] KEELC 1516 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A purchaser of Nairobi land tied to the Kenya School of Government lost everything because the original allocation of public land was illegal from the start.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Plaintiff held valid titles to L.R. Nos. 11512, 11513 and 11514
The Plaintiff holds no valid title; the original allocation was illegal, unprocedural or through a corrupt scheme and no title passed to EAW Enterprises or to the Plaintiff.
The suit land was public land reserved for the Kenya Institute of Administration (now Kenya School of Government) since 1963 and occupied by it. The Commissioner of Lands lacked power under section 7 of the Government Lands Act to alienate unalienated public land, that power resting with the President. Section 26 of the Land Registration Act permits challenge of titles acquired illegally, unprocedurally or through corrupt schemes. EAW Enterprises obtained no title, so it could pass none to the Plaintiff, whose remedy lies against EAW Enterprises in damages.
Scope of the 1st Defendant's counterclaim for cancellation of titles for L.R. Nos. 11509–11514
The counterclaim succeeded only in respect of L.R. Nos. 11512, 11513 and 11514; cancellation was refused for L.R. Nos. 11509, 11510 and 11511.
The court declined to make orders affecting plots not the subject of the suit, since parties holding those titles were not joined, which would offend natural justice. The Plaintiff's suit had been dismissed for want of prosecution, and the counterclaim proceeded by formal proof, which the 1st Defendant proved in respect of the three suit properties.
Legal principles established
#- Public land that has been alienated and designated for public use is not available for private alienation; any allocation of land contrary to the Constitution is void.
- The Commissioner of Lands had no authority under the Government Lands Act to alienate unalienated public land; that power was the preserve of the President.
- Section 26 of the Land Registration Act permits challenge to a certificate of title on grounds of fraud, misrepresentation, illegality, unprocedural acquisition or corrupt scheme; a bonafide purchaser can claim no better title than his vendor had (nemo dat quod non habet).
Court orders
#- 1.The Land Registrar, Nairobi to cancel Titles Nos. I.R 74615, 74614 and 74613 for Land Reference Numbers 11512, 11513 and 11514 forthwith.
- 2.The Land Registrar, Nairobi to issue new titles for Land Reference Numbers 11512, 11513 and 11514 to the Kenya School of Government forthwith.
- 3.No orders as to costs.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction over the plaint and the 1st Defendant's counterclaim (Environment and Land Court); constitutional and statutory land law including Article 62 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "John Kiguru Karume v Kenya Institute of Administration & 4 others [2017] KEELC 1516 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/1516/eng@2017-05-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.