Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2019] KEELC 2340 (KLR)

Esther Muthoni Gathungu v Lucy Njeri (Sued as the administrator of the estate of Kamau Gathungu Mbiriri) [2019] KEELC 2340 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
17 July 2019
1,526 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

#

A Kenyan court corrected a typo in a land case judgment, allowing three family members to be jointly registered as owners of Ngong land.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff, Esther Muthoni Gathungu, as decree holder, moved the court by Notice of Motion dated 29th January 2019 under sections 99 and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act, sections 79 and 80 of the Land Act and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, seeking amendment of the judgment delivered on 13th December 2018 and the decree issued on 10th January 2019. She explained that when she presented the judgment and decree to the Land Registrar Ngong, the registrar observed that they did not expressly state whether to cancel the title issued to Kamau Gathungu (deceased) or transfer ownership of LR No. Ngong/Ngong/55464, that the parcel was too small for further subdivision and a joint title was recommended, and that the name Hiram Machua had been captured incorrectly instead of Hillam Machua Gathungu as per the death certificate. The defendant did not oppose the application, which was supported by the plaintiff's affidavit and submissions. The court framed a single issue: whether the judgment and decree should be amended. Relying on sections 99 and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act and the decisions in Vallabhdas Karsandas Raniga, Leonard Mambo Kuria and Republic v Attorney General ex-parte Kenya Seed Company, the court held that the slip rule permits correction of accidental slips to give effect to the court's original intention and is an exception to functus officio. The court found the amendments would not change the judgment but give effect to its clear intention, and allowed the application, ordering correction of the name and joint registration of the suit land in the names of Esther Muthoni Gathungu, Mary Kabura and Hillam Machua Gathungu after cancellation of Kamau Gathungu's name, with costs in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the court may amend its own judgment and decree after delivery under sections 99 and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act

Holding

Yes - the amendments sought correct an accidental slip and give effect to the court's original intention without changing the judgment

Reasoning

The court relied on section 99 (correction of clerical mistakes and accidental slips in judgments, decrees or orders) and section 100 (amendment to determine the real question in issue). Following Vallabhdas Karsandas Raniga and Leonard Mambo Kuria, it held the slip rule is an exception to functus officio, allowing correction where the court is satisfied it is giving effect to its intention at the time of judgment. The corrections - the deceased's name and the direction to cancel and jointly register the title - did not alter the judgment but implemented it, and no prejudice was shown since the defendant did not oppose.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Sections 99 and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act vest a general power in courts to correct or amend their records, an exception to the functus officio doctrine
  • The slip rule applies where the correction gives effect to the actual intention of the judge when judgment was given

Court orders

#
  1. 1.That the name HIRAM MACHUA GATHUNGU should be amended to read HILLAM MACHUA GATHUNGU
  2. 2.That ESTHER MUTHONI GATHUNGU, MARY KABURA and HILLAM MACHUA GATHUNGU be jointly registered as the proprietors of land parcel number NGONG/NGONG/55464 after the cancellation of the name of KAMAU GATHUNGU (deceased) from the said register
  3. 3.Costs will be in the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Actsection 99
  • Civil Procedure Actsection 100
  • Land Actsections 79 & 80
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51 Rule 1

Cases cited (4)

  • Vallabhdas Karsandas Raniga Vs Mansukhlal Jivraj and others
    (1965) EA 780
  • Leonard Mambo Kuria V Ann Wanjiru Mambo
    (2017) eKLR
  • Jersey Evening Post Limited vs. Ai Thani
    [2002] JLR 542
  • Republic v Attorney General & 15 others, Ex-Parte Kenya Seed Company Limited & 5 others
    [2010] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 99 & 100 of the Civil Procedure Act; Sections 79 & 80 of the Land Act; Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Esther Muthoni Gathungu v Lucy Njeri (Sued as the administrator of the estate of Kamau Gathungu Mbiriri) [2019] KEELC 2340 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/2340/eng@2019-07-17

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