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 874 of 2012· [2022] KEELC 15551 (KLR)

Lilian M'Mbone Ababu v Nairobi Aviation College Limited & 3 others

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
20 December 2022
7,666 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~31 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court cancelled a college's title to a Nairobi property because no valid, signed transfer document ever existed.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Plaintiff sued the 1st Defendant (Nairobi Aviation College Limited), the 2nd Defendant (her former fiancé), the Commissioner of Lands and Co-operative Bank Limited over LR No 209/10498/55, which she bought and had registered in her name in 2004. She claimed she handed the title to the 2nd Defendant merely to pledge as security for his financial dispute with the 1st Defendant, only to later receive an auctioneer's proclamation; she sought injunction, release of the title, discharge and retransfer, and costs. The 1st Defendant counterclaimed for a declaration of trespass, eviction, injunction, mesne profits of Kshs 3,440,000 and general damages, asserting it purchased the property from the 2nd Defendant as a bona fide purchaser for value. At the hearing on May 23, 2022 only the Plaintiff testified; the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants tendered no evidence. The court framed three issues: the Plaintiff's proprietorship and any transfer to the 2nd Defendant; the legality of the 2nd Defendant's registration; and the 1st Defendant's bona fide purchaser status. It held the Plaintiff was the lawful proprietor who never executed any transfer; Section 3(3) of the Law of Contract Act mandates written, signed and attested instruments for land dispositions, so the 2nd Defendant's registration was a nullity, applying Macfoy v United Africa Co Ltd. The 1st Defendant, having adduced no evidence, failed to prove its counterclaim, and submissions could not substitute for evidence. Judgment was entered for the Plaintiff: the charge was cancelled, the transfers and registrations in favour of the 1st and 2nd Defendants were revoked and nullified, the register was rectified in the Plaintiff's favour, a permanent injunction issued, the counterclaim was dismissed, and costs of the suit and counterclaim were awarded to the Plaintiff against the 1st and 2nd Defendants respectively.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Plaintiff was the lawful proprietor and whether she transferred the property to the 2nd Defendant

Holding

The Plaintiff was the lawful proprietor; she never executed any transfer instrument in favour of the 2nd Defendant

Reasoning

The Plaintiff produced a transfer instrument and certificate of title showing registration in her name on August 30, 2004. Her unchallenged evidence was that she only handed the title to the 2nd Defendant as security. No sale agreement or transfer instrument executed by her was produced by any defendant. Section 3(3) of the Law of Contract Act requires written, signed and attested instruments for dispositions of land interests; absent such instruments, no valid disposition occurred.

02

Whether the registration of the suit property in favour of the 2nd Defendant was lawful

Holding

The registration was a nullity and void, being procured without any legal instrument and following an unexplained cancellation of the Plaintiff's entry

Reasoning

The certificate of title showed the Plaintiff's entry (entry number 6) was cancelled, but the cancellation was neither initialed nor countersigned and its author unknown. No transfer instrument was tendered to explain the movement of title to the 2nd Defendant. Relying on Macfoy v United Africa Co Ltd, the court held the registration void ab initio, and consequently the 2nd Defendant had no valid title capable of transfer to the 1st Defendant.

p. 13
03

Whether the 1st Defendant was a bona fide purchaser for value

Holding

The 1st Defendant failed to prove bona fide purchase or its counterclaim, having adduced no evidence

Reasoning

Despite filing 24 pages of submissions invoking Sections 24, 25 and 26 of the Land Registration Act, the 1st Defendant neither attended the hearing nor tendered any evidence. Its amended defence and counterclaim remained bare, unproven pleadings. Citing North End Trading Co Ltd and Daniel Toroitich Arap Moi v Mwangi Stephen Muriithi, the court held submissions cannot substitute for evidence, so the counterclaim failed and no declaration could issue in its favour.

p. 14

Legal principles established

#
  • A contract for the disposition of an interest in land must comply with Section 3(3) of the Law of Contract Act; a non-compliant contract is a nullity ab initio
  • A void act is a nullity needing no court order to set aside; proceedings founded on it collapse
  • Pleadings and submissions are not evidence; a party who calls no evidence cannot prove its claim

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Charge registered over LR No 209/10498/55 canceled, revoked and/or rescinded, unless duly and formally discharged by the 3rd Defendant
  2. 2.The transfer and registration of LR No 209/10498/55 in favour of the 1st Defendant revoked, canceled and nullified
  3. 3.The registration endorsed vide entry number 7 in the certificate of title revoked, canceled and nullified
  4. 4.The register and certificate of title rectified to reflect the Plaintiff as the lawful and legitimate proprietor of LR No 209/10498/55
  5. 5.Permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, jointly and/or severally, from interfering with the suit property
  6. 6.The 1st Defendant's counterclaim dismissed
  7. 7.Plaintiff awarded costs of the suit and counterclaim, borne by the 1st and 2nd Defendants respectively

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Land Registration ActSections 24, 25, 26
  • Law of Contract Act (Cap 23)Section 3(3)
  • Civil Procedure Act (Chapter 21)Section 27

Cases cited (17)

  • Lawrence P Mukiri Mungai v the Attorney General & 4 Others (2017) eKLR
    (2017) eKLR

    Plaintiff's submissions on lawful proprietorship

  • Samuel Odhiambo Oluthe & 2 Others v Jubilee Jumbo Hardware Ltd & Another (2018) eKLR
    (2018) eKLR

    Plaintiff's submissions on proprietorship and invalid transfer

  • Elijah Makiri Nyangwara v Stephen Mungai Njuguna & Another (2013) eKLR
    (2013) eKLR

    1st Defendant's submissions on indefeasibility of title

  • Falcon Global Logistics Company Ltd v Management Committee of Eldamaravine Boarding Primary School (2018) eKLR
    (2018) eKLR

    1st Defendant's submissions on title and bona fide purchase

  • Nyag'ate Guto alias Watson Mogere Mogoko v Maxwell Okemwa Mogoro & Another (2015) eKLR
    (2015) eKLR

    1st Defendant's submissions on title

  • Central Bank of Kenya Ltd v Trust Bank Ltd & 4 Others (1996) eKLR
    (1996) eKLR

    1st Defendant's submissions on title

  • Christopher Ndaru Kagina v Esther Mbandi Kagina & Another (2016) eKLR
    (2016) eKLR

    1st Defendant's submissions on title

  • Katende v Haridar & Company Ltd (2008) 2 EA 173
    (2008) 2 EA 173

    Duties of a bona fide purchaser for value

  • Munyua Maina v Hiram Gathitha Maina (2013) eKLR
    (2013) eKLR

    Bona fide purchaser for value without notice

  • Cecilia Karuru Ngayu v Barclays Bank of Kenya & Another (2016) eKLR
    (2016) eKLR

    Costs

  • Ocean View Plaza v The Attorney General (2002) eKLR
    (2002) eKLR

    Indefeasibility of rights symbolized by title deeds

  • Isaac Gathungu Wanjohi & another v Attorney General & 6 others [2012] eKLR
    [2012] eKLR

    Registration of title absolute and indefeasible where lawfully created

  • Leo Investment Ltd v Estuarine Estate Ltd [2017] eKLR
    [2017] eKLR

    Strict formal requirements of Section 3(3) Law of Contract Act; unsigned contracts are nullities

  • Kukal Properties Development Limited v Tafazzal H Maloo & 3 Others (1993) eKLR
    (1993) eKLR

    Unexecuted agreement for sale of land unenforceable under Section 3(3)

  • Macfoy v United Africa Co. Ltd [1961] 3 All E.R. 1169
    [1961] 3 All E.R. 1169

    A void act is a nullity; proceedings founded on it collapse

  • North End Trading Company Limited (Carrying on the Business under the registered name of Kenya Refuse Handlers Limited v City Council of Nairobi [2019] eKLR
    [2019] eKLR

    Pleadings without evidence remain unsubstantiated and of no probative value

  • Daniel Toroitich Arap Moi v Mwangi Stephen Muriithi & another [2014] eKLR
    [2014] eKLR

    Submissions cannot take the place of evidence

Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over disputes relating to title and registration of land

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Lilian M'Mbone Ababu v Nairobi Aviation College Limited & 3 others", Case Analysis (2022). Environment & Land Case 874 of 2012. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/15551/eng@2022-12-20

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