Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2020] KEELC 1030 (KLR)

Mount Elgon Beach Properties Limited v Issa Mwanongo Mwajima [2020] KEELC 1030 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
15 October 2020
3,350 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~13 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court in Malindi struck out a second adverse possession claim as res judicata and granted the landowner an injunction against the trespasser.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Plaintiff company sought an injunction restraining the Defendant from trespassing on, constructing on or interfering with LR No. 18664 (CR No. 25183), with enforcement by the OCS Kilifi Police Station. The Defendant opposed the suit and application by a Preliminary Objection arguing that the claim was time-barred under Section 7 of the Limitation of Actions Act and an abuse of process, and filed a Defence and Counterclaim asserting adverse possession based on occupation of over 12 years. The Plaintiff in turn objected to the Counterclaim as res judicata, the same adverse possession claim having been raised by the Defendant's relatives in Malindi ELC No. 85 of 2015, where Angote J allowed the Originating Summons, only for the Court of Appeal in Civil Appeal No. 102 of 2018 to overturn that decision on 25 July 2019. The court disposed of the application and both objections together. Applying Mukisa Biscuits, it held the Counterclaim was res judicata and an abuse of process, noting the Defendant's involvement in the earlier family suit and the family meeting minutes. Out of caution the court also examined adverse possession on the merits, finding no evidence of 12 years' dispossession; the Defendant's guilty plea in Criminal Case No. 82 of 2016 for destroying the Plaintiff's boundary pillar showed his occupation was permissive, not hostile, stopping time from running. The Defendant's Preliminary Objection accordingly failed. Finding the Defendant a trespasser, the court granted the injunction enforceable by the OCS Kilifi Police Station subject to the Land Act eviction procedure, struck out the Defence and Counterclaim, and awarded the Plaintiff costs of both the striking out and the application.

Key legal issues

#
01

Res judicata against the Counterclaim

Holding

The Counterclaim for adverse possession is res judicata as the same claim over the same land was determined in Malindi ELC No. 85 of 2015 (Angote J) and on appeal in Civil Appeal No. 102 of 2018

Reasoning

The Defendant's relatives had earlier claimed adverse possession over LR No. 18664 on behalf of the family; the Defendant attended the family meeting designating the applicant and was referred to in the earlier judgment as the applicant's brother. The issues were substantially the same and the Court of Appeal dismissed the earlier claim on 25 July 2019, making the Counterclaim a second attempt.

p. 4
02

Defendant's claim of adverse possession on the merits

Holding

Rejected; the Defendant failed to prove 12 years' exclusive hostile possession, and time stopped running when the owner exercised rights by causing his prosecution for malicious damage

Reasoning

The only clear evidence was a 2016 run-in culminating in Criminal Case No. 82 of 2016 where the Defendant pleaded guilty to destroying the Plaintiff's boundary pillar and was discharged under Section 35(1) of the Penal Code with a caution. His guilty plea acknowledged his occupation was permissive, not hostile, defeating adverse possession.

p. 6
03

Defendant's Preliminary Objection on limitation and jurisdiction

Holding

Dismissed; the objection failed because the Defendant had not established the 12-year dispossession on which the limitation plea depended

Reasoning

The Court found no evidence from which 12 years of dispossession could be inferred. The Defendant's own material showed conflict intensified in 2016 when he tried to occupy part of the land after destroying the Plaintiff's fence, contradicting the claim of long peaceful occupation.

p. 6
04

Plaintiff's entitlement to injunction

Holding

Granted; the Defendant is a trespasser with no basis to remain on the land and the Plaintiff was entitled to injunction under Prayer 3 of the Notice of Motion

Reasoning

Having struck out the Counterclaim and found the Defendant a trespasser with no basis to remain, the court granted the injunction and directed enforcement by the OCS Kilifi Police Station under Prayer 4, subject to compliance with the eviction procedure in Sections 152A, 152C, 152F and 152G of the Land Act 2012.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • A preliminary objection consists of a point of law which may dispose of the suit, such as a plea of limitation or jurisdiction
  • Res judicata bars relitigation of issues already determined between the same parties or those claiming under them and protects the public interest in finality of litigation
  • Adverse possession requires exclusive, open possession as of right without interruption for 12 years, either by dispossessing the owner or where the owner has discontinued possession
  • Possession permissive in nature, acknowledged by pleading guilty to malicious damage at the owner's complaint, cannot mature into adverse possession

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Injunction granted restraining the Defendant from trespassing on, wasting, constructing on, alienating or otherwise interfering with LR No. 18664 (CR No. 25183)
  2. 2.Orders to be enforced by the OCS Kilifi Police Station upon compliance with Sections 152A, 152C, 152F and 152G of the Land Act 2012
  3. 3.Defendant's Defence and Counterclaim struck out with costs to the Plaintiff
  4. 4.Plaintiff awarded costs of the application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Limitation of Actions ActSections 7, 17, 37, 38(1)
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 7
  • Land ActSections 152B, 153A (Revised Edition 2017); Sections 152A, 152C, 152F, 152G (2012)
  • Penal CodeSection 35(1)

Cases cited (6)

  • Mukisa Biscuits –vs- West End Distributors Ltd
    (1969) EA 696
  • Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission –vs- Maina Kiai & 5 Others
    (2017) eKLR
  • Kasuve –vs- Mwaani Investment Ltd & 4 Others
    (2004) 1 KLR
  • Wilfred Kegonye Babu –vs- Henry Mose Onuko
    (1019) eLKR
  • Kalume Mwanongo & Another –vs- Mt. Elgon Beach Properties Ltd (Malindi ELC No. 85 of 2015)
  • Mt. Elgon Beach Properties Ltd –vs- Kalume Mwanongo Mwangaro & Another (Civil Appeal No. 102 of 2018)
Jurisdiction invoked
Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court (Environment and Land Court Act) over land disputes

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mount Elgon Beach Properties Limited v Issa Mwanongo Mwajima [2020] KEELC 1030 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/1030/eng@2020-10-15

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