Kemama & another (Suing as personal representative of the Estate of Amadeo Raymond Kemama - Deceased) v Guangxi Hydroelectric Construction Bureau Kenya Limited (Environment and Planning Civil Case E001 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 7641 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Meru court awarded KShs. 30 million to a family whose land was damaged by waste dumping, proving landowners can win big trespass claims in Kenya.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the plaintiffs, as administrators of the estate, proved trespass onto the suit property
Trespass was established; the plaintiffs, as duly constituted legal administrators with legal and equitable rights over the property, proved unlawful and offensive entry onto a portion of the suit property
The plaintiffs produced evidence of the grant of letters of administration confirming their capacity to sue on behalf of the estate of Amadeo Raymond Kemama (deceased), the registered owner. They also tendered evidence showing the defendant entered the property, deposited assorted debris and waste without consent, laid culverts and exposed the property to storm-water discharge. The evidence was uncontroverted and unimpeached, the defendant having not filed a defence.
The quantum of compensation payable for the trespass
General damages of Kshs.30,000,000/= awarded, comprising Kshs.25,000,800/= for severe, irreversible and permanent soil degradation and Kshs.3,870,000/= for trespass and dumping of waste; the unpleaded special damages heads were disallowed
Guided by the principles in Park Towers Ltd and Kenya Power & Lighting Company Ltd v Ringera, the court held trespass actionable per se but, since injury was shown, assessed damages on restoration cost or diminution in value. The expert agronomist report (exhibit P6) documented the soil degradation and remedial costs, warranting Kshs.25,000,800/= and Kshs.3,870,000/=. Claims for monthly loss of economic access/use and rock removal, being special damages, failed for want of pleading and proof.
Legal principles established
#- Trespass is actionable per se; once trespass is proved, the claimant need not prove specific loss or damage to be awarded damages
- Where trespass causes injury, damages are computed on the basis of the cost of restoration of the land to the status quo ante, or the diminution in value of the property, whichever is less
- The proper plaintiff in trespass to land is the person with title or deemed possession at the time of the trespass
- Special/liquidated damages must be specifically pleaded and particularised and proved by evidence
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that the Defendant's acts of dumping/depositing waste materials, including soil, stones and rocks onto and diverting storm water into plot 90 Timau-Meru County, was wrongful, unlawful and illegal
- 2.An order of permanent injunction restraining the defendant, its servants and/or agents, from further trespassing, dumping/depositing waste materials onto and/or diverting storm water into the suit property
- 3.General damages for trespass awarded in the sum of Kshs.30,000,000/= only
- 4.Interest on the general damages at court rates (14% per annum) from the date of Judgment until payment in full
- 5.Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiffs, to be agreed and in default taxed in the conventional manner
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land and environment disputes (claim founded on trespass to plot 90 Timau, Meru County); based on formal proof after defendant failed to enter appearance
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kemama & another (Suing as personal representative of the Estate of Amadeo Raymond Kemama - Deceased) v Guangxi Hydroelectric Construction Bureau Kenya Limited (Environment and Planning Civil Case E001 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 7641 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7641/eng@2025-11-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.