Mavoko Land Development Company Limited v Mlolongo Catholic Church & 2 others [2022] KEELC 1999 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A company lost its bid to evict a church and schools from land because it had no written sale agreement and had surrendered the plots under an approved subdivision plan.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Defendants are legal entities capable of being sued
The 1st Defendant, a religious society, and the 2nd and 3rd Defendants, institutions managed by it, lack legal capacity to be sued; the suit against them is a nullity.
The court applied the trite position that societies registered under the Societies Act are not bodies corporate and can only sue or be sued through their officials. The Plaintiff described the 2nd and 3rd Defendants as institutions established and managed by the 1st Defendant and led no evidence of their separate legal status. Reliance was placed on Living Water International and Maurice Ooko Otieno.
Whether the Plaintiff proved a sale agreement entitling it to the purchase price or eviction
The claim based on an alleged sale agreement failed because no written agreement was produced as required by section 3(3) of the Law of Contract Act.
Applying sections 107 and 109 of the Evidence Act, the burden lay on the Plaintiff to prove the alleged sale. PW1 admitted there was no written sale agreement. Section 3(3) of the Law of Contract Act requires a contract for disposition of an interest in land to be in writing, signed and attested. Without such a document the claim could not stand.
Whether plots 97 and 98 were surrendered as public utilities under the approved sub-division scheme
The Plaintiff was bound by the conditions of the approved sub-division scheme and ceded its rights over the plots occupied by the Defendants.
Under section 41 of the (repealed) Physical Planning Act and Rule 5(2)(c) of its Second Schedule, conditions of approval bind the owner, successors and assigns. The Plaintiff applied for sub-division and the approval required surrender of all public roads and public utilities, expressly including the Francis of Assisi Secondary School and Health Centre. The Plaintiff never objected to or varied the conditions.
Legal principles established
#- A society registered under the Societies Act, including a religious organisation, has no legal personality and can only sue or be sued through its officials.
- A suit founded on a contract for the disposition of an interest in land cannot succeed without a written contract signed by all parties and attested as required by section 3(3) of the Law of Contract Act.
- Conditions imposed on approval of a sub-division scheme bind the owner, who must surrender land reserved for public utilities; objection should be raised at approval stage, not afterwards.
Court orders
#- 1.The Plaintiff's suit is dismissed with costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution (Environment and Land Court jurisdiction over land disputes) - suit filed by Plaint in the Environment and Land Court
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Taireni Association of Mijikenda v Chakama Ranching Limited & 7 others; National Land Commission & 2 others (Interested Parties)[2023] KEELC 18551 (KLR)7 Jul 2023applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mavoko Land Development Company Limited v Mlolongo Catholic Church & 2 others [2022] KEELC 1999 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Machakos ELC Case (Plaint dated 27th July 2016). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/1999/eng@2022-01-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.