Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedMombasa ELC Case No. E075 of 2022 (lead file), consolidated with ELC Case No. 139 of 2022· [2026] KEELC 2470 (KLR)

Waweru & 8 others v Mureithi t/a Kenya Projects Budget & Executive Homes (Environment and Land Case E075 & 139 of 2022 (Consolidated)) [2026] KEELC 2470 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
30 April 2026
1,798 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Mombasa court ordered a developer to complete lease documentation for 13 homebuyers because money alone could not compensate for land.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By a Plaint dated 8th June 2022 in Mombasa ELC Case No. E075 of 2022, Haniel Kinyua Gatimu and eight others sued David Mureithi Kanyi T/A Kenya Projects Budget & Executive Homes seeking specific performance compelling him to supply lease title documents for seven bungalows on parcel MN/1/343, and alternatively an order authorising the Court Registrar to execute documents for the sub-division and grant of leases. A second Plaint dated 21st November 2022 by Noel Ngomeni Mbaru and three others sought similar orders in respect of four maisonettes on the same parcel. The suits were consolidated on 27th April 2023 with E075 of 2022 as the lead file. The Plaintiffs' case was that they entered into separate sale agreements and addenda between 2015 and 2018 under which the Defendant was to develop the houses, hand over vacant possession and title documents, and actuate the management company, obligations he breached. The Defendant entered appearance but filed no defence, did not testify and called no witnesses. Nine witnesses testified for the Plaintiffs. Applying the principles in Gharib Suleiman Gharib and Reliable Electrical Engineers, the court found a valid and enforceable contract, performance by the Plaintiffs, and breach by the Defendant; land being peculiar, damages were not an adequate remedy. Judgment was entered for the 13 Plaintiffs in terms of the primary prayers of both Plaints with costs; the alternative prayers were declined.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Plaintiffs proved a valid, enforceable contract and entitlement to specific performance

Holding

Yes. The Plaintiffs proved they entered into agreements, performed their side of the bargain, and the Defendant failed and/or neglected to perform his obligations; the Defendant neither filed a defence nor testified, leaving the Plaintiffs' evidence uncontroverted, and damages are inadequate for land.

Reasoning

The Plaintiffs produced the sale agreements, addenda and correspondence showing agreed Completion Dates which the Defendant failed to meet. The Defendant entered appearance but filed no defence, and neither testified nor called witnesses. The Plaintiffs' evidence that they are home owners in occupation of the suit property was therefore uncontroverted. Applying the principles in Gharib Suleiman Gharib and Reliable Electrical Engineers, the court held that a valid enforceable contract existed, that the Plaintiffs had performed, and that land being peculiar, damages would not suffice, making specific performance the appropriate remedy.

p. 10

Legal principles established

#
  • Jurisdiction to order specific performance is based on the existence of a valid and enforceable contract, and being an equitable relief it is granted where damages are insufficient
  • Specific performance is discretionary and will not be granted where an adequate alternative remedy (damages) exists
  • Land is unique and damages may not be an adequate remedy for breach of a land sale contract

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Judgment entered for the 13 Plaintiffs in terms of prayers 'a' to 'f' of the Plaint dated 8th June 2022
  2. 2.Judgment entered in terms of prayers 'a' to 'd' in the consolidated suit dated 21st November 2022
  3. 3.The prayers expressed in the alternative declined
  4. 4.Costs of the suits awarded to the Plaintiffs

Authorities

#

Cases cited (2)

  • Gharib Suleiman Gharib –vs- Abdulrahman Mohamed Agil
    LLR No. 750 (CAK) Civil Appeal No. 112 of 1998
  • Reliable Electrical Engineers (K) Ltd –vs- Mantrac Kenya Limited
    (2006) KEHC 2855 KLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over disputes relating to land (contracts for sale of houses on parcel MN/1/343)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Waweru & 8 others v Mureithi t/a Kenya Projects Budget & Executive Homes (Environment and Land Case E075 & 139 of 2022 (Consolidated)) [2026] KEELC 2470 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Mombasa ELC Case No. E075 of 2022 (lead file), consolidated with ELC Case No. 139 of 2022. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2470/eng@2026-04-30

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