Vincent E. Mukoko v Abdirahman Abdinur;Harun Omam Okal Okeyo(Interested Party) [2021] KEELC 1262 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ordered a buyer who refused to vacate after his purchase option expired to pay Kshs.3.75 million plus costs for lodging a fraudulent caveat and overstaying.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Defendant was entitled to compensation and whether he was liable for damages for the fraudulent caveat
The option to purchase lapsed on failure to exercise it within six months; the Defendant lodged a caveat on a forged sale agreement and is liable in damages, awarded at Kshs.500,000
The lease agreement gave the Defendant six months to exercise the option to purchase. He adduced no evidence that he pursued the Plaintiff or deposited the purchase monies. The burden lay on him to prove the sale agreement he relied on to lodge the caveat, and he failed. Under Section 75 of the Land Registration Act, 2012, a wrongful caveat attracts compensation; the court applied the restitutionary measure of damages and assessed Kshs.500,000 as reasonable.
Whether the Interested Party is entitled to mesne profits
Yes; mesne profits of Kshs.3,250,000 awarded for the Defendant's occupation from 27th May 2008 to April 2019
The property was transferred to the Interested Party on 27th May 2008, yet the Defendant continued in occupation without paying rent until eviction in April 2019. Mesne profits, as defined in Section 2 of the Civil Procedure Act, are recoverable for wrongful occupation. The court computed the award at the contractual rent of Kshs.25,000 per month for the period of occupation, arriving at Kshs.3,250,000.
Who should bear the costs of the suit
Costs follow the event; the Defendants to bear the Plaintiff's and Interested Party's costs
Applying Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act and the principle that costs follow the event, the court awarded costs to the successful Plaintiff and Interested Party against the Defendant, consistent with prior rulings in the suit that had also entitled the Plaintiff to costs.
Legal principles established
#- A person who lodges or maintains a caveat wrongfully and without reasonable cause is liable to pay compensation to any person who has sustained damage
- A person wrongfully deprived of property is entitled to mesne profits for the period of wrongful occupation
Court orders
#- 1.The Plaintiff is awarded Kshs.500,000/- general damages
- 2.The Interested Party is awarded Kshs.3,250,000/-
- 3.The costs to the Plaintiff and the Interested Party to be borne by the Defendants
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 36 rules 3B and 12 of the Civil Procedure Rules, Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Section 57(5) of the Registered Title Act (Cap 281) (repealed)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Vincent E. Mukoko v Abdirahman Abdinur;Harun Omam Okal Okeyo(Interested Party) [2021] KEELC 1262 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). ELC Case No. 13 of 2008 (OS). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/1262/eng@2021-10-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.