Catholic Archdiocese of Mombasa (Registered Trustees) v Kinango Sub-County Hospital & 4 others (Environment and Land Case E017 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 3855 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kwale court confirmed the Catholic Archdiocese owns the Kinango hospital land, ruling the Government only maintains buildings there and cannot deal with the property.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the suit had merit notwithstanding that the Defendants adduced no evidence
The suit was meritorious; the Plaintiff's unchallenged documentary evidence proved ownership of Plot No. 2 Zone 4/Kinango, and the Defendants produced no title, allotment letter or proprietary documentation to controvert it.
The court held that while uncontroverted evidence still must meet the statutory burden of proof under Sections 107-109 of the Evidence Act, the Plaintiff produced a consistent chain of documents: the 1969 request letter, the 1970 handing-over letter for maintenance only, the PDP of 1969 revised in 1990, and the 1982 Sisters of St. Joseph letter. The PDP earmarked Plot No. 2 for hospital use and allocated a separate parcel for a mosque. The Defendants' occupation was a licence for maintenance purposes only, conferring no ownership.
Whether the Plaintiff was entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief and directions for adjudication of Zone 4 parcels
The Plaintiff, having discharged the burden of proof, was entitled to all reliefs sought: declaration of ownership, permanent injunction, and an order that the Ministry of Lands and NLC adjudicate and register Zone 4 parcels per the PDP.
The court found continuous possession and beneficial ownership since the 1960s; the handover of buildings was for maintenance only. The declaratory prayer was grounded in Article 40, the injunction justified under Order 40 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules to prevent irreparable harm through dispossession, and the adjudication direction consistent with the mandate of the Ministry of Lands and NLC under Article 67 and Sections 5 and 6 of the Land Act, 2012, granted in the public interest.
Who should bear the costs of the suit
Costs followed the event; the Defendants, jointly and severally, were to bear the costs, there being no special circumstances to depart from the general rule under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.
The court invoked Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap. 21, under which costs follow the event unless the court for good reason orders otherwise. The Plaintiff succeeded in establishing ownership; the Defendants failed to controvert the evidence and persisted in actions necessitating litigation. No special circumstances justified departure, and the successful party should not bear the expenses of vindicating its rights.
Legal principles established
#- Even where the Defendant fails to call evidence, the Plaintiff must still discharge the burden of proof by adducing credible and believable evidence which convinces the Court on a balance of probabilities.
- Mere occupation or management of a facility does not translate into proprietary rights unless supported by lawful transfer or registration.
- Possession and development of land, coupled with recognition by authorities, can establish equitable ownership even absent formal registration.
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered in favour of the Plaintiff, The Catholic Archdiocese of Mombasa (Registered Trustees), as per the Plaint dated 19th March 2024, in its entirety
- 2.A declaration that Plot No. 2 Zone 4/Kinango measuring approximately 2.80 hectares is the property of the Plaintiff, and ownership documents shall forthwith be issued in its favour
- 3.A finding that the 1st Defendant, Kinango Sub-County Hospital, is a bare licensee on the suit premises, permitted only to maintain the hospital buildings and equipment pursuant to the handover letter of 4th December 1970
- 4.A permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their agents, servants, employees, relatives, or any persons acting under their instructions from erecting structures, sub-dividing, alienating, allocating, registering, transferring, or otherwise dealing with Plot No. 2 Zone 4/Kinango in any manner detrimental to the Plaintiff's rights
- 5.The Ministry of Lands and the National Land Commission to adjudicate and register Zone 4 parcels in accordance with the Part Development Plan of 1969 (revised in 1990), and issue ownership documents to the Plaintiff
- 6.Costs of the suit borne jointly and severally by the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th & 5th Defendants, payable to the Plaintiff, with interest at court rates from the date of judgment until payment in full
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act No. 19 of 2011; Articles 40 and 62 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Catholic Archdiocese of Mombasa (Registered Trustees) v Kinango Sub-County Hospital & 4 others (Environment and Land Case E017 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 3855 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3855/eng@2026-06-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.