Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment· [2018] KEELC 1823 (KLR)

Hellen Chelel Mulama v Kenya Electricity Transmission Company Limited (KETRACO) [2018] KEELC 1823 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
27 July 2018
AOA. OMBWAYO
1,445 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

KETRACO must pay a landowner KShs 1.8 million for installing power lines on her Eldoret plot without permission.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Hellen Chelel Mulama, the registered owner of plot Eldoret Municipality Block 15/1982, sued Kenya Electricity Transmission Company (KETRACO) claiming that in 2016 it entered her land without consent, surveyed it and erected transmission masts and overhead cables for the high voltage Eldoret-Kitale 132Kv transmission line, dissecting and diminishing the plot's value. She sought compensation of Kshs. 6,500,000 being the open market value of the plot, plus valuation fees and costs. KETRACO admitted erecting the towers but maintained that it created a right of way under the Land Act 2012 rather than compulsorily acquiring land, contending the plaintiff had no title when the line was constructed and that the land was originally Government property. The matter proceeded by way of case stated, with liability for compensation admitted, leaving only the quantum of compensation, the costs of the valuation reports and the costs of the suit for determination. Three valuation reports were filed: City Valuers at Kshs. 6,000,000 for the affected 20%, Capital Valuers at Kshs. 800,000, and a joint report placing the value between Kshs. 800,000 and Kshs. 1,200,000. Relying on section 46 of the Energy Act, CAP 314, which forbids entry onto land to lay electric supply lines without the owner's prior permission, the court found the defendant a trespasser liable to pay. It rejected both extreme valuations and awarded Kshs. 1,800,000, plus Kshs. 22,500 for valuation costs, and costs of the suit plus interest. Judgment was delivered at Eldoret on 27 July 2018.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the defendant was liable to compensate the plaintiff for erecting transmission masts and lines on her land

Holding

The defendant's entry and installation of power lines without the owner's permission constituted trespass, making it liable to pay compensation, which was admitted to be due

Reasoning

The defendant constructed electric towers on the suit property for the Eldoret-Kitale 132Kv transmission line. Section 46 of the Energy Act requires prior permission of the landowner before entry to lay or survey for electric supply lines. No such permission was obtained from the plaintiff, so the installation was a trespass. Compensation was admitted and only quantum fell for determination.

p. 2
02

What quantum of compensation the plaintiff should receive for the affected 20% of her plot

Holding

A middle figure of Kshs. 1,800,000 was awarded, between the plaintiff's City Valuers figure of Kshs. 6,000,000 and the defendant's Capital Valuers figures of Kshs. 800,000 and Kshs. 1,200,000

Reasoning

Three valuation reports were before the court: City Valuers at Kshs. 6,000,000 for the affected area, Capital Valuers at Kshs. 800,000, and a joint report placing the land at Kshs. 800,000 to Kshs. 1,200,000. The court found the plaintiff's report too high and the defendant's too low, and fixed Kshs. 1,800,000 having regard to the property's location, accessibility and characteristics.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • No person may enter upon another's land to lay electric supply lines or survey for that purpose without the prior permission of the landowner; a trespasser installing power lines is liable to pay compensation
  • Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of property, and no one shall be deprived of property except in the public interest and subject to conditions provided by law

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Compensation of Kshs. 1,800,000 awarded to the plaintiff for the affected property
  2. 2.Costs of valuation of Kshs. 22,500 granted
  3. 3.Costs of the suit plus interest awarded

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Energy Act, CAP 314, Laws of KenyaSection 46
  • Land ActRight of way provisions (as cited by the defendant)
Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over a land/trespass claim arising at Eldoret, within the court's jurisdiction

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (2)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Hellen Chelel Mulama v Kenya Electricity Transmission Company Limited (KETRACO) [2018] KEELC 1823 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/1823/eng@2018-07-27

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