John Gicheru t/a Ruiru Green Estate v Gakuu (Environment and Land Appeal E019 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 2990 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed that an oral land sale can be enforced through constructive trust despite the written contract requirement.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether an oral contract for the sale of land, non-compliant with section 3(3) of the Law of Contract Act, can be enforced through constructive trust
Yes - the doctrine of constructive trust can supersede the writing requirement, and the trial Court correctly granted specific performance on equitable principles
Relying on Kitilit v Kibet and Macharia Mwangi Maina, the Court held that Article 10(2)(b) elevates equity to a constitutional principle. The Appellant received Kesh 27,794,000 for ten plots, transferred nine, and retained the tenth without proving his claim of Kesh 3,500,000. He was therefore a constructive trustee of the retained plot and retaining it would be unconscionable.
Whether the Appellant proved his claim for Kesh 3,500,000 in subdivision and transfer costs justifying retention of the 10th plot
No - the claim was unsupported; the burden of proof lay on the Appellant under sections 106 and 107 of the Evidence Act
The Appellant produced no demand letter or documents supporting the alleged costs. He did not explain how he arrived at the figure, nor why he received the full purchase price if he did not intend to sell. He also failed to explain how he transferred nine plots while contending there was no contract.
Whether the trial Court erred by 're-writing' the contract between the parties
No - implying terms to fill gaps is not re-writing a contract; parties are bound by their terms absent coercion, fraud or undue influence
Citing National Bank of Kenya v Pipleplastic Samkolit, the Court reiterated that courts cannot re-write contracts but may imply terms to fill obvious gaps. Describing gap-filling as 're-writing' is a misnomer. The Magistrate's findings were on equitable principles, not a re-writing of a non-existent written contract.
Legal principles established
#- A first appeal court must evaluate afresh the evidence on record and draw its own independent conclusions while bearing in mind it did not see or hear the witnesses
- Equitable doctrines of constructive trust and proprietary estoppel may apply to and supersede statutory writing requirements for land contracts, per Article 10(2)(b) of the Constitution
- The application of equitable doctrines is not automatic and depends on the facts of each case
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed with costs to the Respondent
- On appeal from
- Ruiru Chief Magistrates Court
- MCELC No. E182 of 2022
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal from the Chief Magistrate's Court (statutory appellate jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "John Gicheru t/a Ruiru Green Estate v Gakuu (Environment and Land Appeal E019 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 2990 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). MCELC Appeal from Ruiru Chief Magistrates Court MCELC No. E182 of 2022 (Memorandum of Appeal dated 9/02/2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/2990/eng@2025-04-01
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.