Fredrick Muroki Grieve v County Government of Machakos [2021] KEELC 2060 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Machakos court ordered the County Government to restore a plot owner's name in its register after it was removed without notice, evidence, or a hearing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Plaintiff proved ownership of Plot No. 49 on a balance of probabilities
Yes - the Sale Agreement of 1991, the 1997 and 2007 registers and the 2016 rates receipt established ownership and possession
The Plaintiff produced the Sale Agreement with George Mutiso, register extracts for 1997 and 2007 showing him as owner, and a 2016 receipt for rent. The Defendant's own witnesses admitted the Plaintiff appeared as owner until 2005. No evidence was adduced of any transfer from the Plaintiff to Benedict Mutua or his wife, so the Plaintiff's case was proved on a balance of probabilities.
Whether the Defendant adduced evidence justifying the removal of the plot and the Plaintiff's name from the register
No - the Defendant produced no records of the serialisation, the alleged transfer to Benedict Mutua, or that the Plaintiff was heard
Although DW1 and DW2 asserted that Plot No. 49 became Plot No. 132 and that the Plaintiff sold the plot to Benedict Mutua, no documents, minutes, agreements or notices were produced. The 2007 register still bore the Plaintiff's name. The court found the alleged change of ownership unproven and unexplained, and no evidence that the Plaintiff was heard before the change.
Whether the Defendant breached Articles 40 and 47 of the Constitution
Yes - removing the Plaintiff's name from the register without evidence of lawful process or a hearing breached both provisions
The court held that property rights under Article 40 may only be limited per Article 40(3), and Article 47 requires fair administrative action before a decision adversely affecting a person. The Defendant removed the Plaintiff from its register without notice or explanation, thereby breaching both constitutional provisions.
Legal principles established
#- Article 40 of the Constitution protects the right to property and prohibits deprivation of property except as provided under Article 40(3); Article 47 guarantees fair administrative action where a decision adversely affects an individual
Court orders
#- 1.An order that the Defendant updates its register to reflect the existence of Plot No. 49 Kithendu Market and the Plaintiff's name as the owner of the said Plot No. 49
- 2.The Defendant to pay the costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction (plaint seeking orders relating to land register); constitutional provisions Articles 40 and 47 of the Constitution of Kenya invoked
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Fredrick Muroki Grieve v County Government of Machakos [2021] KEELC 2060 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in judgment (Plaint dated 9th November, 2016). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/2060/eng@2021-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.