Theuri (Suing as the Guardian and Manager of the Estate of Wilson Theuri Kimuri) v Lekaram (Environment & Land Case E008 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 3067 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court set aside a land sale made by an elderly vendor with dementia, finding the deal unconscionable and refusing to transfer the land to the buyer.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Mental capacity of the vendor to contract
Wilson Theuri's diminished mental capacity compromised his bargaining power and he lacked capacity to enter the sale agreement; the unchallenged psychiatric evidence of Alzheimer's dementia and his medical retirement in 1994 supported this
The psychiatrist diagnosed Alzheimer's dementia with impaired cognition and inability to make sound judgments, evidence the defence never rebutted or challenged, and called no expert. The Barclays Bank letter showed memory failure leading to medical retirement in 1994, and the court reasoned he could not have been in better health 16 years later. Inconsistencies between the Defendant and Mr. Kiget on how they met the vendor further undermined the defence.
Whether the sale was an unconscionable bargain
The contract was unconscionable: illogical terms (clause 14 remitting the deposit only on registration; clause 15 requiring occupation before the agreement date), piecemeal payments beyond the completion date, disbursements to third parties without written authority, and dual representation without independent legal advice
The court identified terms adverse to the vendor that no reasonable person would accept, payments made in instalments over a prolonged period contrary to the agreement, and payment vouchers with impossible dates. Mr. Kiget acted for both parties, gave no independent legal advice, and disbursed funds without explanation. Applying Muiruri and Strydom, this amounted to unconscientious conduct by the advocate and the Defendant as the stronger party.
Whether the suit property still existed as L.R No. 2787/421
The mother title no longer exists; the property was subdivided into Nanyuki Municipality Block 12/148 to 12/151, confirmed by the amended RIM and registration correspondence
Official correspondence from the Director of Surveys confirming the amended registry index map, and the letter forwarding leases for registration, established the subdivision. Consequently the Plaintiff's prayer for reversion of the mother title could not be granted in that form, though the subdivision-related reliefs were otherwise granted.
Defendant's counterclaim based on constructive trust, estoppel and payment of full purchase price
The counterclaim fails; the Defendant's remedy, having paid some consideration, lies in recovering the purchase price from the manager or guardian of Wilson Theuri's estate
Because the transaction was vitiated by unconscionable conduct and the vendor lacked capacity, no constructive trust could arise in the Defendant's favour. The court noted discrepancies in the claimed overpayment and the advocate's failure to keep proper client accounts or prove payments by bank statements, and declined to order transfer of Block 12/148.
Legal principles established
#- Courts will interfere with or refuse to enforce contracts that are unconscionable, unfair or oppressive, whether due to procedural abuse in formation or terms unreasonably favourable to one party that preclude meaningful choice
- Before setting aside a contract as an unconscionable bargain, three factors must be demonstrated: one party disadvantaged, exploitation of that disadvantage in a morally culpable manner, and an overreaching and oppressive transaction; the burden then shifts to the other party to show the transaction was fair, just and reasonable
Court orders
#- 1.The court grants prayers (iii), (iv), (vi) and (vii) of the Further Amended Plaint dated 10/10/2023 (declaration that the sale transaction is set aside; permanent injunction; cancellation of the subdivision scheme approval; surrender of the original Grant No. I.R 29199 or issuance of a duplicate/provisional grant, as per the reliefs sought)
- 2.The court declines to grant the orders sought in the counterclaim
- 3.Each party will bear its costs for the suit and the counterclaim
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land (Article 162(2)(b) implied; Article 40 of the Constitution relied on by the Plaintiff)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Theuri (Suing as the Guardian and Manager of the Estate of Wilson Theuri Kimuri) v Lekaram (Environment & Land Case E008 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 3067 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (Nanyuki ELC suit; see also Nanyuki CM ELC No. E042 of 2022). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/3067/eng@2025-02-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.