Nakitare v Speed Capital Limited & 4 others (Environment and Land Case 211 of 2017) [2026] KEELC 5274 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court cancelled a fraudulently registered charge on Karen land but refused damages, and struck out the bank's loan-recovery counterclaim for lack of jurisdiction.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction over the 1st defendant's counterclaim for the outstanding loan balance
The counterclaim was struck out; the ELC has no jurisdiction over accounting questions, which lie with the High Court commercial division.
Relying on the Court of Appeal decision in Co-operative Bank of Kenya Limited v Njuguna & 5 others, the court held that its jurisdiction under Article 162, Section 13 of the ELC Act and Section 150 of the Land Act does not extend to accounting questions. The claim for the outstanding balance of Kshs.8,333,333.30 with interest is an accounting matter reserved for the High Court under Article 165(3). Notably, DW1 did not pursue the claim at the hearing.
Whether the plaintiff proved the allegations of fraud
Yes, fraud was proved to the required standard against the 2nd defendant, and the 1st defendant was found to have acted in collusion with him.
The expert report (PW1) found no similarity between the plaintiff's known signatures and the questioned signatures and was not rebutted. The 2nd defendant was convicted of forgery on five counts in criminal case no. E334 of 2021 on 2nd February 2024, with no appeal overturning that conviction. There was no relationship between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant; the loan was disbursed before the charge was registered; the amounts disbursed (Kshs.5,000,000) did not match the charge (Kshs.10,000,000); and no statutory notice was issued to the plaintiff. The court inferred collusion and found the registration of the charge unlawful, null and void.
Whether the plaintiff was entitled to the orders sought in the amended plaint
Partially: declarations of ownership, nullity of the charge, permanent injunction and rectification of the register were granted; damages and orders against the 3rd, 4th and 5th defendants were refused.
The court found merit in the amended plaint insofar as the plaintiff's ownership and the fraudulently registered charge were concerned. However, trespass and illegal activities were not proved, the participation of the 3rd, 4th and 5th defendants in the fraudulent scheme was not shown, and the orders sought against the 4th defendant regarding criminal matters were beyond the ELC's powers.
Legal principles established
#- The ELC's jurisdiction is limited to the areas specified under Article 162 of the Constitution, Section 13 of the ELC Act and Section 150 of the Land Act, none of which concern determination of accounting questions, which fall within the High Court's jurisdiction.
- Fraud must be specifically pleaded, its particulars stated on the face of the pleading, and it must be distinctly alleged and distinctly proved; it cannot be inferred from the facts.
- Fraud must be proved to a standard above a balance of probabilities but not beyond reasonable doubt.
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that the plaintiff is the registered owner of land reference no. 5892/10 situated in Karen, Ololua ridge
- 2.A permanent injunction against the defendants restraining them from interfering with the suit property known as land reference no. 5892/10
- 3.A declaration that the charge dated 8th April, 2016 and registered on 12th April, 2016 is fraudulent therefore null and void, and it is cancelled
- 4.The 3rd defendant directed to rectify the register cancelling and revoking the charge instrument
- 5.Costs of the amended plaint awarded to the plaintiff, borne by the 1st and 2nd defendants
- 6.The 1st defendant's amended counterclaim dated 9th September, 2024 struck out with costs to the plaintiff
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2) of the Constitution and the Environment and Land Court Act (ELC court's jurisdiction limited to Article 162, Section 13 ELC Act and Section 150 Land Act)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nakitare v Speed Capital Limited & 4 others (Environment and Land Case 211 of 2017) [2026] KEELC 5274 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELCC No. 211 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5274/eng@2026-08-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.