Jackson Majinga Vilili & 4 others v Royal Nairobi Golf Club; Kenya Urban Roads Authority & 2 others [2020] KEELC 3431 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Five occupants lost their bid to claim seven acres of golf club land through adverse possession because they couldn't prove exclusive possession.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Plaintiffs proved adverse possession of the seven acres
Claim failed for want of proof of exclusive, continuous possession for twelve years from the date of the Defendant's registration
The Defendant was registered as lessee only from 1/11/1999, so time could run only from that date. The Plaintiffs' own evidence showed about 300 occupants plus roughly 2000 tenants, and the suit was not brought on behalf of all occupants. The Plaintiffs did not lead evidence proving the exact size of the portions they occupy, defeating the requirement of exclusive possession for the statutory period.
Whether adverse possession may be claimed over a portion of the registered owner's land
Yes; a portion may be claimed, but only to the extent of the claimant's exclusive control
Relying on the Court of Appeal decision in Johnson Kinyua v Simon Gitura Rumuri, the court held that a claimant may claim a portion rather than the whole parcel, but the claimant is limited to the portion over which exclusive control is proved, which the Plaintiffs failed to establish here.
Whether the Plaintiffs were entitled to compensation for the land taken for the link road
No; compensation not proved
Under the Land Act compensation is payable to persons whose interests in compulsorily acquired land are determined, but the Plaintiffs did not prove that the land they occupy was taken up by the road or that their structures were demolished by the Interested Parties.
Whether the Defendant holds the land in trust for the Plaintiffs
Trust not proved
The court found that the Plaintiffs produced no evidence establishing a trust in their favour over the Suit Property.
Legal principles established
#- A claimant for adverse possession may claim a portion of land registered in a defendant's name and does not have to claim the whole parcel
- Time in adverse possession runs only from the date the defendant was registered as owner of the land, not before
Court orders
#- 1.The court declined to grant the orders sought in the Amended Originating Summons filed on 8/10/2019
- 2.Each party to bear its own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 7, 13, 37 and 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act, Cap 22, and Order 37 Rules 7 and 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jackson Majinga Vilili & 4 others v Royal Nairobi Golf Club; Kenya Urban Roads Authority & 2 others [2020] KEELC 3431 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). ELC Case No. 232 of 2017 (O.S). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/3431/eng@2020-02-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.