Wanjala Ojiambo Mubweka & 2 Others v Francis Otieno Barasa & Another
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court corrected its own 2019 land judgment on review, cancelling one title outright while refusing to cancel a second parcel.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the advice of the Land Registrar amounted to discovery of new and important matter or evidence
Yes - the advice could not have been within the Plaintiffs' knowledge at the time of judgment
The Registrar advised, upon presentation of the decree, that cancellation of parcel 9224 would revert it to the original registrant who had fraudulently acquired it. The court found this clearly new and important matter discovered only when the decree was presented to the Land Registry, satisfying the first limb of Order 45 Rule 1(1).
Whether the application was brought without unreasonable delay
Yes - delay was not unreasonable
Neither party could state with certainty when the Land Registrar gave the advice. The court held that in such circumstances the benefit of doubt goes to the applicants, so the delay could not be found unreasonable.
Whether the application raises a new cause of action requiring a fresh suit
No - it corrects an error apparent on the face of the record
The court held that the original judgment ought to have specified in whose name the cancelled title should be registered. Its omission was an error by the court itself, not negligence by the Plaintiffs, and is properly corrected by review rather than a fresh suit.
Whether the pending appeal/stay bars the review and enforcement
No
The Notice of Appeal dated 3rd November 2023 was not lodged in the registry, not signed by the Deputy Registrar, and not served. No stay orders had been issued by this Court or the Court of Appeal, and particulars of any pending appeal were not disclosed.
Legal principles established
#- A blanket cancellation of title without indicating in whose name it should be registered is an error apparent on the face of the record warranting review
- A notice of appeal which is not endorsed by the Registrar impacts on the timeliness of all other steps on appeal, and a notice of appeal by itself is not enough to stay execution
Court orders
#- 1.The judgment delivered on 21st May 2019 and the consequential Decrees and Orders are reviewed and substituted with an order that title to parcel No Bukhayo/Bugengi/9224 be cancelled and the same revert to the name of Peter Ojiambo Mubweka
- 2.Title to the land parcel No Bukhayo/Bugengi/9225 shall not be cancelled
- 3.Costs to the Plaintiffs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rule 1(1) and Order 51 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wanjala Ojiambo Mubweka & 2 Others v Francis Otieno Barasa & Another", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment (Busia Environment and Land Court; Notice of Motion dated 31st January 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/318/eng@2025-02-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.