Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedEnvironment & Land Case 475 of 2017 (Formerly Makueni ELC No. 370 of 2017 and Machakos CMCC No. 1053 of 2013)· [2022] KEELC 14708 (KLR)

Malinda v Mbaka (Being sued as the legal representative and administrator of the estate of Jane Muthoni Mbaka (deceased))

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
7 November 2022
4,915 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~20 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ordered a deceased vendor's estate to transfer 8 acres to a buyer who had paid and developed the land, despite missing Land Control Board consent.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff sued for specific performance of a Sale Agreement dated November 27, 2008 under which the defendant's deceased mother (Jane Muthoni Mbaka) agreed to sell her eight acres carved out of Nzaui/Nziu/920 (later subdivided into Nzaui/Nziu/940) at Kshs 1,600,000. The plaintiff paid Kshs 1,441,000, took possession in 2008 and developed the land, but no Land Control Board consent to transfer was obtained because the vendor, who bore that contractual obligation, failed to procure it. The defendant counter-claimed, contending the agreement was a void controlled transaction for want of consent, unenforceable for lack of stamping, and that the plaintiff breached it by blocking an access road; she sought a refund of Kshs 517,000 and damages. The court framed four issues: constructive trust, the plaintiff's entitlement to the orders sought, the defendant's entitlement on the counter-claim, and costs. Applying Willy Kimutai Kitilit, Macharia Mwangi Maina and William Kipsoi Sigei, the court held that part performance created a constructive trust - an overriding interest - rendering the transaction enforceable despite the missing consent. It further held the ELC has equal status with the High Court and discretion under Section 8(1) of the Land Control Act to enlarge time for obtaining consent, and exercised it. The vendor, being in breach and without clean hands, could not rescind nor succeed on the counter-claim. Specific performance, a declaration that the 90-day completion period had not expired, an order for the parties to seek Land Control Board consent within 90 days, and costs were granted to the plaintiff; damages were refused for want of evidence.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a constructive trust was created in favour of the Plaintiff despite absence of Land Control Board consent

Holding

Yes - part performance (payment of most of the purchase price, possession and development since 2008 with the vendor's blessing) created a constructive trust, an overriding interest, making the transaction enforceable despite lack of consent

Reasoning

Relying on Willy Kimutai Kitilit, Macharia Mwangi Maina and William Kipsoi Sigei, the court held the equitable doctrines of constructive trust and proprietary estoppel supersede the Land Control Act where a transaction is void for lack of consent. The vendor received most of the purchase price, showed the plaintiff the portion to occupy, and she possessed and developed it from 2008. Section 38(2)(b) of the Land Act excludes constructive trusts from statutory formalities.

p. 8
02

Whether the court could enlarge time to apply for Land Control Board consent

Holding

Yes - the ELC has equal status with the High Court and discretion under Section 8(1) of the Land Control Act to extend time, which it exercised

Reasoning

The obligation to procure the consent was the vendor's under the Sale Agreement, incapacitating the plaintiff from applying. Following Caroline Cherono Kirui v Liner Cherono Towett, the court held the transaction not voided for want of consent since the power to enlarge time would otherwise be pointless, and proceeded to extend time.

03

Whether the Defendant was entitled to rescind the contract and to the Counter-claim orders

Holding

No - the Defendant herself breached the contract, had no capacity to rescind, and came to court with unclean hands

Reasoning

The vendor was contractually obliged to obtain the Land Control Board consent and delayed completion; she never issued the 21-day completion notice required under Clause 4(7) of the Law Society of Kenya Conditions of Sale. Having breached the agreement, she could not rescind it, and her unclean hands defeated the Counter-claim, including the claim over the blocked access road.

Legal principles established

#
  • The ELC, having equal status with the High Court, has jurisdiction to enlarge time for applying for Land Control Board consent notwithstanding expiry of the six-month period
  • Where a purchaser has paid most of the purchase price, taken possession and developed the land, a constructive trust arises which renders a transaction lacking Land Control Board consent enforceable notwithstanding Section 6 of the Land Control Act
  • A party in breach of a contract has no capacity to rescind it

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Defendant be and is hereby directed to specifically execute and transfer title number Nzaui/Nziu/940 measuring eight (8) acres to the Plaintiff within a period of fourteen (14) days from the date hereof, failure of which, the transfer be executed by the Deputy Registrar, Environment and Land Court Machakos
  2. 2.A declaration be and is hereby issued that the period of ninety (90) days contemplated under Clause D within which to effect the transfer has not expired
  3. 3.An order be and is hereby issued directing the parties or their legal representatives herein to appear before the relevant Land Control Board to seek for consent to transfer Title Number Nzaui/Nziu/940 in favour of the Plaintiff within 90 days from the date hereof, and the balance of the purchase price be paid upon delivery of the completion documents, including the consent of the Land Control Board as well as a signed Transfer in respect to the suit property
  4. 4.Costs of the suit is awarded to the Plaintiff

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Law of Contract ActSection 3(3)
  • Land Control ActSection 8(1)
  • Land ActSection 38(2)(b)
  • Stamp Duty ActSection 5
  • Law Society of Kenya Conditions of Sale1989 Edition, Clause 4(7)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 10(2)(b)

Cases cited (21)

  • Joseph Mathenge Kamutu v Joseph Wainaina Karanja & Another
    (2019) eKLR
  • Anne Murambi v John Munyao Nyamu & Another
    (2018) eKLR

    Requirements for valid rescission in accordance with contract terms and Law Society Conditions of Sale notice

  • Beatrice Muthio Nzioka v Charles Akelo Ongwen
    (2014) eKLR
  • Ann Mumbi Hinga v William Mwangi Gathuma & Another
    [2017] eKLR

    Rescission arises only where the rescinding party is not in default and has given notice of default

  • Willy Kimutai Kitilit v Michael Kibet
    [2018] eKLR

    Constructive trust and proprietary estoppel supersede the Land Control Act for void controlled transactions

  • Mamta Peeush Mahajan (Suing on behalf of the estate of Peeush Premlal Mahajan) v Yashwant Kumari Mahajan
    (2017) eKLR
  • Thomas Joseph Openda v Peter Martin Ahli
    (1983) KLR
  • David Sironga Ole Tukai v Francis Arap Muge & 2 Others
    (2014) eKLR
  • Kariuki v Kariuki
    (1982) eKLR
  • Fred C Fedha v E. Asava Majani
    (2010) eKLR
  • Elijah Shamalla Benjamin Momo v Gerry Chibeu
    (1988) eKLR
  • Rose Wakanyi Karanja & 3 Others v Geoffrey Chege Kirundi & Another
    (2016) eKLR
  • Concepta Nyaboke v Peter Muasya Wangaika & 2 Others
    (2019) eKLR
  • Joseph Boro Ngera v Wanjiru Kamau Kaime & Another
    (2010) eKLR
  • Julius Charito Kanyongo v Emmanuel M. Lousot
    (2018) eKLR
  • Glencore Grain Limited v TSS Grain Millers Ltd
    (2002) eKLR
  • Robert Mbui v Kennedy Mwanzia Musembi
    (2019) eKLR
  • Macharia Mwangi Maina & 87 Others v Davidson Mwangi Kagiri
    [2014] eKLR

    Constructive trust based on common intention applies notwithstanding the Land Control Act

  • William Kipsoi Sigei v Kipkoech Arusei & another
    [2019] eKLR

    Constructive trust created where vendor received full purchase price and allowed purchaser long possession

  • Yaxley v Gotts & Another
    (2000) Ch 162

    Void oral sale agreement still enforceable via constructive trust or proprietary estoppel

  • Caroline Cherono Kirui v Liner Cherono Towett
    (2018) eKLR

    Court's power to enlarge time for Land Control Board consent renders transaction not void

Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution (Environment and Land Court) with equal status to the High Court under Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act, including power under Section 8(1) of the Land Control Act to extend time

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Malinda v Mbaka (Being sued as the legal representative and administrator of the estate of Jane Muthoni Mbaka (deceased))", Case Analysis (2022). Environment & Land Case 475 of 2017 (Formerly Makueni ELC No. 370 of 2017 and Machakos CMCC No. 1053 of 2013). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/14708/eng@2022-11-07

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