Mbaro Johnson & 9 others(Suing on their own behalf and on behalf of the Squatters/Residents of Junda Kasarani Ndogo Residing upon Property Title No. 771/Ii/Mn Numbering 430 appearing in the schedule of members of Bahati Junda Self Help Group attached to the Originating Summons Herein) v Taveta Teachers Investment Limited [2019] KEELC 4025 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Ten squatters won Kenyan court recognition of ownership over 47 acres they had openly occupied for over 12 years, defeating the registered owner.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the plaintiffs had been in uninterrupted possession of the suit property for more than 12 years
Yes - the plaintiffs proved exclusive, open and uninterrupted possession for over 12 years.
PW1 testified he had lived on the land since 1998 as Chairman of Bahati Junda Self Help Group with 430 members who had built houses, schools, shops, clinics, churches and mosques. PW2 and PW3 corroborated his evidence and a letter from the Chief confirming their stay was produced. The evidence was unchallenged by the defendant.
Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a declaration of adverse possession
Yes - having proved the statutory period of open, exclusive and uninterrupted possession, the plaintiffs acquired title by adverse possession.
The court applied the principles from Wambugu v Njuguna as adopted in Gerald Muriithi v Wamugunda Muriuki and Kasuve v Mwaani Investments Ltd, requiring dispossession of the owner or discontinuance of possession by the owner, and possession as of right for the statutory 12 years. The unchallenged evidence satisfied the standard on a balance of probabilities.
Whether a permanent injunction should issue against the defendant
Yes - the defendant, its agents and contractors were permanently restrained from entering the property, demolishing structures, damaging crops or evicting the plaintiffs.
Having found that the plaintiffs had acquired title by adverse possession and were in occupation of the suit land, the court granted the consequential injunctive relief to protect that occupation, as sought in the plaintiffs' prayer for a permanent injunction.
Legal principles established
#- To acquire title by adverse possession the claimant must prove exclusive, open, continuous and uninterrupted possession as of right for 12 years, either after dispossessing the owner or discontinuance of possession by the owner.
- Possession must be as of right - nec vi, nec clam, nec precario (no force, no secrecy, no persuasion) - and the owner must have knowledge or the means of knowing of the possession.
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that the plaintiffs have acquired title to the disputed land by adverse possession having lived on the suit land for over twelve (12) years openly and without any interference by anyone
- 2.Permanent injunction restraining the defendant, by self, agents, servants, family members and other authorized persons and independent contractors from entering the suit property or demolishing the houses, structures or damaging or harvesting the plaintiffs crops therein or evicting or interfering with the plaintiffs user and occupation of the suit property with their families
- 3.Costs to the plaintiff
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over claims relating to title and occupation of land (adverse possession claim under the Limitation of Actions Act)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mbaro Johnson & 9 others(Suing on their own behalf and on behalf of the Squatters/Residents of Junda Kasarani Ndogo Residing upon Property Title No. 771/Ii/Mn Numbering 430 appearing in the schedule of members of Bahati Junda Self Help Group attached to the Originating Summons Herein) v Taveta Teachers Investment Limited [2019] KEELC 4025 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). ELC Case No. 318 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/4025/eng@2019-03-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.