Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedOriginating Summons dated 21st January 2019 (Eldoret)· [2021] KEELC 4209 (KLR)

Board of Management,Symbios Kabeiyo Primary School & 2 others v Elizabeth Jelagat Chepsiror [2021] KEELC 4209 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
24 February 2021
8,204 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~33 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court in Eldoret ruled that a school and children's home occupying land since 2000 had legally become its owners through twelve years of uninterrupted possession.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The three plaintiffs, by originating summons dated 21st January 2019, sought a declaration that they had acquired 11.8 acres out of Uasin Gishu/Sosiani Settlement Scheme/112 by adverse possession, an order for subdivision, and registration as proprietors in place of the estate of the late Kipyego Chepsiror Kilil. Their case, through PW1 Stephen Kipsang Boit, was that the land was purchased for them through Pastor Francis Onziova between 2000 and 2005; they took immediate, open, peaceful and exclusive possession, built a school and children's home, and had never been sued or asked to vacate. The defendant, administratrix of the estate, admitted the sale to Francis and the plaintiffs' occupation but disputed that the sale was on their behalf. The respondent opposed on three grounds: want of jurisdiction given Ibrahim J's ruling of 23rd November 2007 in Succession Cause No. 170 of 2005 (which stayed the succession cause, ordered the rival purchasers to litigate and inhibited dealings); incompetence of the summons for annexing an official search rather than a certified extract of title; and lack of capacity to contract. The court held the official search sufficed for Registered Land Act titles; that the plaintiffs' capacity was demonstrated by registration documents and trustee memoranda; that the succession court's ruling preserved rather than ousted jurisdiction, this suit implementing its direction that ownership be litigated; and that adverse possession was proved, possession since 2000 being open, continuous and adverse, prescriptive rights crystallising between 2012 and 2017. The court found the plaintiffs entitled to be registered as owners of the 11.8 acres. No express costs order appears in the judgment.

Key legal issues

#
01

Competence of the originating summons for annexing an official search instead of a certified extract of title

Holding

The official search was sufficient; nothing turns on the omission of a certified extract for land registered under the Registered Land Act

Reasoning

Relying on Johnson Kinyua v Simon Gitura Rumuri, the court held that for Registered Land Act titles a search certificate signed by the Registrar is evidence of the register entries. The Registrar's signature is presumed under section 37(2) of the repealed Act, and the defendant never disputed authenticity of the search. The search showed the registered proprietor.

p. 8
02

Whether the plaintiffs had capacity to contract and to sue

Holding

The court found capacity was demonstrated by the memorandum of understanding releasing the former trustees and by registration and statutory compliance documents for the school and children's home

Reasoning

The defendant's capacity objection rested on lack of a trust deed or certificate of incorporation. The court noted no one complains that the plaintiffs bought or occupy the land; memoranda of understanding relinquished the original trustees; and certificates and inspection reports showed the institutions were duly registered and operational, grounding the plaintiffs' standing.

p. 8
03

Effect of the Succession Cause and Ibrahim J's ruling of 23rd November 2007 on jurisdiction

Holding

The ruling merely preserved the estate pending resolution of the ownership dispute; determining this suit implements, not offends, that ruling and does not disturb estate distribution

Reasoning

Ibrahim J had stayed the succession cause and directed the two disputing purchasers to litigate ownership in the High Court, with transmission of the result to the succession court. This suit is that ownership litigation. The administrator agreed the land was sold to Francis. The ELC is therefore not reviewing the succession court's orders but adjudicating ownership consistent with them.

p. 9
04

Whether adverse possession of 11.8 acres was proved

Holding

Yes; possession since 2000-2005 was open, continuous, exclusive and adverse, dispossessing the registered owner; prescriptive rights crystallised between 2012 and 2017

Reasoning

Both witnesses confirmed the plaintiffs purchased through Francis and occupied openly, running a school and children's home, with no suit for eviction ever filed. Entry was by purchase, not permission; once the purchase price was fully paid the possession became adverse. The defendant conceded occupation, establishing dispossession for over twelve years.

p. 8

Legal principles established

#
  • An official search certificate duly signed by the Registrar suffices in place of a certified extract of title for Registered Land Act land in an adverse possession originating summons
  • Where a purchaser has paid the full purchase price and taken possession, his possession becomes adverse to the vendor and time runs in his favour
  • A claimant for adverse possession must prove factual possession and animus possidendi, use nec vi nec clam nec precario for twelve years, knowledge by the registered owner, and continuous uninterrupted possession
  • A Succession Court's stay and inhibition orders preserving an estate pending resolution of a purchasers' dispute do not oust the ELC's jurisdiction to determine the ownership dispute

Court orders

#
  1. 1.A declaration that the plaintiffs have acquired 11.8 acres out of land parcel No. Uasin Gishu/Sosiani Settlement Scheme/112 by adverse possession and are entitled to be registered as owners of the said 11.8 acres

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Limitation of Actions ActSection 38(1), CAP 22
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 37 rule 7
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 159, 162(2)(b), 165(3)(a)
  • Registered Land Act (repealed)Sections 36(2), 37(2)
  • Environment and Land Court ActSection 13
  • Trustee (Perpetual Succession) ActSection 3
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 3A

Cases cited (30)

  • Macharia Maina & 87 Others vs Davidson Mwangi Kagiri
    (2014) eKLR
  • Kynoch Ltd vs Rowlands
    (1912) 1 Ch 527
  • Littledale vs Liverpool College
    (1900) 1 Ch 19
  • Sisto Wambugu vs Kamau Njuguna
    (1983) eKLR
  • Hosea V. Njiru & Others
    (1974) EA 526
  • Bridges vs Mees
    (1957) 2 All ER 577
  • Leigh vs Jack
    (1879) 5 EX D 264
  • Isaac Cypriano Shingore vs Kipketer Togom
    Eldoret CACA No. 212 of 2012
  • Githu Vs Ndeete
    [1984] KLR 776
  • Mount Carmel Investments Ltd vs Peter Thurlow Ltd and another
    [1988] 3 All ER 12
  • Re the Matter of the Interim Independent Electoral Commission
    (2010) eKLR
  • Owners of Motor Vessel 'Lillian S' v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Limited
    [1989] KLR 1
  • Wilson Kazungu Katana & 101 others v Salim Abdalla Bakshwein & another
    [2015] eKLR
  • Elephant Soap Factory Ltd vs Nahashom Mwangi & Sons
    (1971) KHCD N126
  • Joel K. Yegon & 4 Others V. John Rotich & 4 Others
    Nairobi Misc. Civil Application No. 995 of 2005
  • The Tee Gee Electrics and Plastics Co Ltd v Kenya Industrial Estates Ltd
    Civil Appeal No. 333 of 2001
  • Karisa Chengo & 2 others v Republic
    [2015] eKLR
  • Republic v Karisa Chengo & 2 others
    [2017] eKLR
  • Samuel Kamau Macharia & Another v Kenya Commercial Bank and two others
    (2012) eKLR
  • Nawaz Abdul Manji & 4 others v Vandeep Sagoo & 8 others
    [2017] eKLR
  • Management Committee of Shalem Community Edicators & 7 Others v Registered Trustees of Micro Enterprises Support Programme Trust
    [2016] eKLR
  • Kasuve v Mwaani Investments Limited & 4 others
    [2004] 1 KLR 184
  • Haro Yonda Juaje v Sadaka Dzengo Mbauro & another
    [2014] eKLR
  • Samuel Miki Waweru v Jane Njeri Richu
    Civil Appeal No. 122 of 2001
  • Munyaka Kuna Company Limited Vs Bernado Vicezo De Masi
    (2018) eKLR
  • Johnson Kinyua v Simon Gitura Rumuri
    [2011] eKLR
  • Public Trustee vs Wandura
    1984 KLR 314
  • Mbira vs Gachuhi
    (2002) EALR 137
  • Celina Muthoni Kithinji vs Safiya Binti Swaleh & 8 Others
    (2018) eKLR
  • Eliud Nyongesa Lusenaka & Another vs Nathan Wekesa Omocha
    Kisumu Court of Appeal No. 134 of 1993
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Board of Management,Symbios Kabeiyo Primary School & 2 others v Elizabeth Jelagat Chepsiror [2021] KEELC 4209 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Originating Summons dated 21st January 2019 (Eldoret). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/4209/eng@2021-02-24

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