Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in the judgment (Iten ELC suit; referred parties' prior case Eldoret ELC Case No.1006 of 2012)· [2024] KEELC 1792 (KLR)

Kapkiagut Clan Community Based Organization & others v AIC Kenya Trustees Registered & others

Environment and Land Court
25 March 2024
6,994 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~28 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan clan lost its land claim against a church trust because it could not prove ownership or fraud.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiffs, officials of the Kapkiagut clan, sued seeking cancellation of the 1st defendant's title (grant No. I.R.N 5935, L.R No.23748) and rectification of the register to substitute the plaintiffs' names in trust for the clan, alleging the land is unadjudicated ancestral community land fraudulently excised and registered in the 1st defendant's name in 2001. The 1st defendant (AIC Kenya Trustees Registered) denied the claim, asserting the land was donated by the Rokocho community in 1986, that it has occupied and developed the land since then, and that it followed due process in obtaining title; it also pleaded res judicata based on Eldoret ELC Case No.1006 of 2012. The 3rd and 4th defendants maintained that no law bars issuance of title before adjudication. The court framed three issues: ownership, fraud, and appropriate orders. On the evidence, including testimony of a Government Surveyor that the suit land lies between the Cheptebo and Rokocho adjudication sections, the court found the dispute essentially a boundary dispute between the plaintiffs' clan and Rokocho clan, with no proof that it was resolved in the plaintiffs' favour and no explanation of the circumstances of the 1st defendant's entry. The plaintiffs failed to prove ownership or fraud; registration before adjudication was held not to amount to fraud. The suit was dismissed with costs to the defendants.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the plaintiffs are the true owners of the suit land

Holding

Plaintiffs failed to prove ownership; the land lies between Cheptebo and Rokocho and the dispute is essentially a boundary dispute with Rokocho clan

Reasoning

The court found evidence of a long-running boundary dispute between the plaintiffs' clan and Rokocho clan, but no evidence that the dispute was resolved in the plaintiffs' favour. The 1st defendant has been in use, possession and control of over 40 acres since the early 1980s without claim by the plaintiffs or their predecessors, and there was no evidence of displacement or eviction. The County Surveyor located the suit land between the two adjudication sections.

p. 13
02

Whether the 1st defendant obtained title fraudulently

Holding

No fraud proved; registration before adjudication is not proof of fraud

Reasoning

Although it was not disputed that the suit land fell within an adjudication area and was not adjudicated when the 1st defendant obtained its certificate of lease, the court held that obtaining a lease before adjudication is not proof of fraud. The plaintiffs also never reported the alleged fraud to the DCI and produced no documentary support for the allegation.

p. 13
03

What orders should the court make

Holding

Suit dismissed with costs to the defendants

Reasoning

Having failed to prove ownership and fraud, the plaintiffs were not entitled to the orders sought in the plaint, including cancellation and rectification of title. The 1st defendant held a leasehold title and had occupied and developed the land since the 1980s with community facilities.

p. 13

Legal principles established

#
  • Obtaining a certificate of lease over land within an adjudication area before adjudication is complete is not, by itself, proof of fraud.
  • A party claiming ownership must adduce evidence capable of proving ownership; a boundary dispute with a third clan cannot sustain a claim against the title holder.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The plaintiffs' suit is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the suit to the defendants

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 63
  • Registration of Titles Act (Cap 281) (repealed)Section 23
  • Land Registration Act, 2012Section 26
  • Community Land Act, 2012 (referred as 2016 in submissions)Section 2
  • Land Adjudication Act (Cap 284)Not specified

Cases cited (9)

  • Daniel Musili Nyeki & 49 others v. Cabinet Secretary of Lands & Settlement & another; Bernard Malonza Musya & 30 others (Interested Parties)
    (2021) eKLR
  • Stephen Kipkosgei Samoei & 61 Others v. William Chepkiyeng & 21 Others
    (2013) eKLR
  • Republic v. Minister for Transport & Communication & 5 others ex parte Waa Ship Garbage & 15 Others
    Mombasa HCMCA No.617 of 2003 (2006) 1 KLR (E & L) 563
  • Teresia Wangari Mbugua v. Jane Njeri Nduati & another
    (2020) eKLR
  • In Re Estate of Raphael Ngugi (Deceased)
    (2022) eKLR
  • Munyu Maina vs. Hiram Gathiha Maina
    Civil Appeal No.239 of 2009 (unreported)
  • R.G. Patel v. Lalji Makani
    (1957) E.A 314
  • Gladys Wanjiru Ngacha v. Treresa Chepsaat & 4 Others
    (2013) eKLR
  • Vijay Morjaria v. Nansingh Madhusingh Darbar & Another
    (2000) eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over disputes relating to title to land

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kapkiagut Clan Community Based Organization & others v AIC Kenya Trustees Registered & others", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment (Iten ELC suit; referred parties' prior case Eldoret ELC Case No.1006 of 2012). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/1792/eng@2024-03-25

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