Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedMisc Application No. 148 of 2013· [2017] KEELC 2132 (KLR)

Florence Gakii v Alex Mutembei Kirima & another [2017] KEELC 2132 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
10 July 2017
LML. N. Mbugua
225 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Meru court converted a signed settlement into an enforceable judgment, requiring land sellers to refund a buyer Kshs. 1.5 million.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a miscellaneous application in the Environment and Land Court at Meru concerning land parcel LR. NO. NTIMA/NTAKIRA/4375. On 10 July 2017 the advocates for the plaintiff, Florence Gakii, and the defendants, Alex Mutembei Kirima and Lucy Kigetu Kirima, proffered a consent which they asked the Court to adopt as its judgment. The consent provided that the defendants would refund the plaintiff's consideration for the purchase of the suit land together with other costs, totalling Kshs. 1,500,000/- all inclusive; that the orders of inhibition placed on the subject land parcel be lifted, vacated and/or set aside; and that the matter be deemed settled and/or withdrawn with each party bearing its own costs. The Court, per L. N. Mbugua, ELC Judge, found that the consent was properly signed and binding upon the parties. Having read the consent to the parties present, who confirmed agreement with its contents, the Court adopted the consent dated 10/07/2017 as a judgment of the Court and ordered that parties bear their own costs. The judgment was delivered in open court at Meru on 10 July 2017, with Kithinji appearing for the plaintiff and D. Rimita holding brief for E. G. Mwangi for the defendants, both parties present. No authorities or statutes were cited; the matter was resolved entirely by consent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the consent of 10/07/2017 could be adopted as a judgment of the Court

Holding

The consent was properly signed, binding, and was adopted as the Court's judgment.

Reasoning

The advocates for both parties proffered a consent on 10/07/2017 providing for refund of the purchase consideration of Kshs. 1,500,000/- all inclusive, lifting of the inhibition orders on the suit land, and settlement/withdrawal of the matter with each party bearing its own costs. The judge read the consent to the parties present, who agreed with its contents, and found it properly signed and binding before adopting it as judgment.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • A consent properly signed by the parties' advocates and agreed to by the parties is binding and may be adopted as a judgment of the court.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Adoption of the consent dated 10/07/2017 as a judgment of the Court
  2. 2.Defendants to refund the plaintiff's consideration for purchase of land parcel LR. NO. NTIMA/NTAKIRA/4375 and other costs totalling Kshs. 1,500,000/- all inclusive
  3. 3.Orders of inhibition placed on LR. NO. NTIMA/NTAKIRA/4375 to be lifted, vacated and/or set aside
  4. 4.Matter deemed settled and/or withdrawn with each party bearing its own costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Consent of the parties adopted as judgment of the Court (Environment and Land Court, Meru)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Florence Gakii v Alex Mutembei Kirima & another [2017] KEELC 2132 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Misc Application No. 148 of 2013. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/2132/eng@2017-07-10

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