Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedApplication dated 4 November 2020 (within ELC Suit concerning Plot L.R No. 397/MN, Originally Nos. 181 and 187)· [2021] KEELC 3306 (KLR)

Kencent Holdings Limited & another v Mati Charo Matsere & 330 others [2021] KEELC 3306 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
11 May 2021
1,032 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court can order its Deputy Registrar to sign documents a stubborn party refuses to execute, and lift caveats blocking a court-ordered settlement.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling by Munyao Sila J of the Environment and Land Court at Mombasa, delivered on 11 May 2021, determines an application dated 4 November 2020 filed by the 2nd plaintiff in a long-running land suit. The suit land, L.R No. 397/MN (Originally Nos. 181 and 187) CR No. 1940, had been sold by the 2nd plaintiff to the 1st plaintiff, Kencent Holdings Limited, in 2005 for Kshs. 43,945,000/=, with Equity Bank registering a charge to secure the balance of the purchase price. After the plaintiffs obtained judgment for eviction of over 300 occupants from Ojwang' J, the parties negotiated a settlement under which the occupiers would buy their occupied portions, with proceeds shared 20:80 between the 1st plaintiff and the applicant, as ordered in a ruling delivered by Yano J on 31 October 2019. The applicant complained that although the bank had signed discharge of charge instruments, the 1st plaintiff refused to sign them, blocking subdivision and implementation of the settlement. The 1st plaintiff filed nothing in opposition. The court declined to summon the directors or commit them to civil jail, instead directing the Deputy Registrar to sign all documents needed for the discharge of charge, deeming them executed by the 1st plaintiff. The court also ordered the Land Registrar to lift caveat entry No. 19 on the title, there being no objection. Costs were not awarded.

Key legal issues

#
01

Enforcement of court orders against a non-compliant corporate party

Holding

Instead of punitive or contempt measures, the court directed the Deputy Registrar to execute the discharge of charge documents on behalf of the 1st plaintiff

Reasoning

The 1st plaintiff filed nothing opposing the application. The court reasoned that committal or show-cause orders were unnecessary; the practical remedy was to have the Deputy Registrar sign the discharge of charge documents, which would be deemed executed by the 1st plaintiff. This achieves the purpose of the earlier orders of 31 October 2019 and 24 May 2020 without punitive measures.

p. 2
02

Removal of caveat to facilitate implementation of the court's orders

Holding

The Land Registrar was ordered to lift caveat entry No. 19 on the register of the suit land

Reasoning

The court found that subdivision of the land for sale to the occupying defendants could not proceed until the discharge of charge was registered, and the title could not be affected while the caveat remained. There being no objection to lifting the caveat, the court ordered the Land Registrar to remove it.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a party refuses to execute documents necessary to give effect to a court order, the court may direct the Deputy Registrar to sign those documents on the party's behalf and they will be deemed executed by that party
  • A caveat on the register obstructs dealing with title and must be lifted where there is no objection, to enable implementation of the court's orders

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order directing the Deputy Registrar of the court to sign all documents needed to be signed by the 1st plaintiff to discharge the charge, such documents to be deemed executed by the 1st plaintiff for all intended purposes
  2. 2.An order that the Land Registrar do lift the caveat registered as entry No. 19 in the register of the suit land
  3. 3.No orders as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent and execution powers of the High Court (Environment and Land Court) to enforce its own orders, including authorising the Deputy Registrar to execute documents a party refuses to sign

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kencent Holdings Limited & another v Mati Charo Matsere & 330 others [2021] KEELC 3306 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Application dated 4 November 2020 (within ELC Suit concerning Plot L.R No. 397/MN, Originally Nos. 181 and 187). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/3306/eng@2021-05-11

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