Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherELC 61 of 2015· [2019] KEELC 455 (KLR)

Fredrick M’Rutere v Barnabas Kariuki Gathekia; Kenneth Kirima M’Rutere (Applicant) [2019] KEELC 455 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
26 November 2019
174 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 Kenyan land dispute ended by agreement: the landowner pays Sh1 million, restrictions are lifted, and the occupants leave within 30 days.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a short consent/judgment of the Environment and Land Court at Meru in ELC 61 of 2015, a land dispute over L.R No. Nyaki/Mulathankari/774 between Fredrick M'Rutere and Kenneth Kirima M'Rutere (plaintiff and applicant) and Barnabas Kariuki Gathekia (defendant). On 23.05.2019, the advocates for the parties jointly proffered a consent and asked the court to adopt it as a judgment. The consent provided that: (i) the defendant would pay the plaintiffs Kshs. 1,000,000 as full and final compensation for the suit land; (ii) all cautions, inhibitions, encumbrances and/or restrictions on the suit land would be removed forthwith; (iii) the plaintiff, his agents, children, relatives and/or assignees would vacate the land within 30 days of signing the consent; and (iv) each party would bear its own costs of the suit. On 26 November 2019, Hon. L. N. Mbugua, ELC Judge, delivered the judgment in open court at Meru, adopting the consent and marking the suit as settled in terms of the consent filed on 23.5.2019. The judgment is purely consent-based: no contested evidence was taken, no issues were tried, and no authorities were cited. The terms of settlement, including the compensation payment, vacation of the land and discharge of encumbrances, now stand as orders of the court.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the consent dated 23.05.2019 should be adopted as a judgment of the court

Holding

The court adopted the consent as a judgment, marking the suit as settled in its terms

Reasoning

The advocates for the parties jointly proffered a consent on 23.05.2019 and asked the court to adopt it as a judgment. The consent provided for payment of Kshs. 1,000,000 as full and final compensation for the suit land, removal of cautions and encumbrances, vacation of the land by the plaintiff's side within 30 days, and each party bearing its own costs. The court, exercising its power over matters properly before it, adopted the consent and marked the suit settled.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A consent duly entered into by the advocates for the parties may be adopted by the court as a judgment, marking the suit as settled in terms of the consent

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Adoption of the consent filed on 23.5.2019 as a judgment, ordering the defendant to pay the plaintiffs Kshs. 1,000,000 (one Million) as full and final compensation for L.R No. Nyaki/Mulathankari/774
  2. 2.Removal of all cautions, inhibitions, encumbrances and/or any restrictions on the suit land forthwith
  3. 3.The plaintiff, his agents, children or relatives and/or assignees to vacate the suit land within 30 days of signing of the consent
  4. 4.The suit marked as settled in terms of the consent filed on 23.5.2019
Jurisdiction invoked
Consent of the parties adopted as judgment of the court under the court's inherent power to record settlements in suits filed before the Environment and Land Court (ELC 61 of 2015)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Fredrick M’Rutere v Barnabas Kariuki Gathekia; Kenneth Kirima M’Rutere (Applicant) [2019] KEELC 455 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). ELC 61 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/455/eng@2019-11-26

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