Samuel H. Kanyi v Water Resource Management Authority & another [2022] KEELC 1741 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the plaintiff proved his claim for special damages on a balance of probabilities
The claim was not proved; the valuation report was discredited because the valuer produced no practising certificate, no advertisements, no sale agreements for comparables and no photographs of the damaged items
The claim was one for special damages requiring strict proof. The plaintiff's valuer admitted on cross-examination that he had no proof of his qualification as a valuer, undermining the valuation report. No advertisements, sale agreements or photographs corroborated the alleged loss. The Court of Appeal decision in Banque Indo Suez v DJ Lowe was held binding. The Court also found the claim made in bad faith since the plaintiff had already accepted and acknowledged Kshs 1,000,000 under an out-of-court settlement before reneging.
Effect of the out-of-court settlement between the plaintiff and the interested party
The parties had agreed a compromise of Kshs 1,343,928/- of which Kshs 1,000,000 was paid and acknowledged; the court directed the parties to honour the remaining obligations
The interested party's evidence of the settlement and part-payments was uncontroverted. The plaintiff acknowledged receipt of Kshs 700,000 and later Kshs 300,000, then reneged and returned to court. The court found the claim made in bad faith and scandalous and enforced the balance of the agreed settlement, including the re-routing of pipes.
Legal principles established
#- Special damages must not only be specifically pleaded but must also be strictly proved.
Court orders
#- 1.The Interested Party to pay the plaintiff the sum of Kshs 343,000/- within 60 days from the date of judgment being the balance of the agreed out-of-court settlement
- 2.The Interested Party to reroute the water pipes traversing the middle of the plaintiff's land as agreed between them
- 3.Each party to bear her own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Environment and Land Court jurisdiction over the land dispute (land parcel MWERUA/BARICHO/460)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Samuel H. Kanyi v Water Resource Management Authority & another [2022] KEELC 1741 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Kerugoya ELC Case (plaint dated 20/04/2011, Further Amended 07/12/2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/1741/eng@2022-02-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.