Laurenzia Wanjuki & 2 others v Elias Mugendi Njeru & another [2018] KEELC 672 (KLR)
The bottom line
#An Embu court dismissed a family's land trust claim for lack of proof and ordered them to vacate within 90 days, though no one paid costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether a trust in favour of the Kagwi family existed over the suit property
The trust was not proved; the deceased was registered as absolute proprietor in his own right
The claim was not a conventional customary trust but an alleged unusual arrangement that the deceased bought the land on behalf of the family to secure a refund. None of the surviving Kagwi family members corroborated it; the payment of Kshs 1,800/2,800 was not shown; the deceased charged the land to banks between 1973 and 2000 with no family objection over 45 years. The court was not satisfied the trust was proved.
Whether the Plaintiffs were entitled to the reliefs sought in their plaint
Not entitled, as the reliefs depended on the unproven trust
Since the declaratory and transfer reliefs were premised on the existence of the trust, and the court found the trust unproved, the Plaintiffs' suit necessarily failed and was dismissed.
Whether the Defendants were entitled to the reliefs in the counterclaim (eviction and damages for trespass)
Entitled to prayer (a) only - eviction; damages not awarded
Having found no trust, the deceased was absolute proprietor and the Defendants as administrators were entitled to the counterclaim reliefs. However, judgment was entered in terms of prayer (a) only of their plaint, i.e. eviction, with a 90-day grace period to vacate.
Costs
Despite costs following the event, each party to bear own costs because the litigants are relatives
The general rule under section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act is that costs follow the event, but DW3's evidence established that the parties are relatives, and the court considered it appropriate that each party bear its own costs despite the Defendants' success.
Legal principles established
#- Costs of an action are at the discretion of the court but the general rule is that costs follow the event
- A party alleging a trust over registered land must prove it to the required standard, and unexplained long inaction by alleged beneficiaries weighs against the claim
Court orders
#- 1.The Plaintiffs' suit dismissed
- 2.Judgment entered for the Defendants against the Plaintiffs in terms of prayer (a) only of the plaint dated 22nd July 2009 (eviction)
- 3.The Plaintiffs granted a grace period of ninety (90) days to vacate the suit property, failing which execution shall comply with applicable laws including the Land Laws (Amendment) Act 2016
- 4.Each party to bear his or her own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Environment and Land Court jurisdiction (first-instance land claim; no specific constitutional provision invoked)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Laurenzia Wanjuki & 2 others v Elias Mugendi Njeru & another [2018] KEELC 672 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). E.L.C. Case No. 151 of 2014 (formerly Embu HCC No. 21 of 2009), consolidated with Embu HCCC No. 132 of 2009. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/672/eng@2018-11-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.