[1987] KECA 31 (KLR)

[1987] KECA 31 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that there was no evidence, either in the written agreement or in the oral testimony, to support the existence of a condition precedent to the sale of land. The original agreement for 11.5 acres was superseded by a subsequent agreement for 5.3 acres, which was properly pleaded and relied upon after amendment. The appellant's argument that the sale was conditional on obtaining alternative land was not supported by the facts or the terms of the second agreement. The issue of trust was not pleaded in the defence, and there was no evidence that the appellant held the land in trust for his family. The Registered Land Act's provisions on trusts did not apply in the...

Citation
[1987] KECA 31 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Simon Odinga; Respondent: Charles Sande
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
9 February 1987
Case Number
Civil Appeal 108 of 1985
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Land Sale Agreements, Conditional Precedent, Trusts in Land, Registered Land Act, Land Control Act
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Specific Performance Land Sale Agreements Conditional Precedent Trusts in Land Registered Land Act Land Control Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon Odinga

Appellant

Charles Sande

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the agreement for sale of land was subject to a condition precedent.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was entitled to specific performance or only a refund of the purchase price.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant held the land in trust for himself and his family.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that there was no evidence, either in the written agreement or in the oral testimony, to support the existence of a condition precedent to the sale of land. The original agreement for 11.5 acres was superseded by a subsequent agreement for 5.3 acres, which was properly pleaded and relied upon after amendment. The appellant's argument that the sale was conditional on obtaining alternative land was not supported by the facts or the terms of the second agreement. The issue of trust was not pleaded in the defence, and there was no evidence that the appellant held the land in trust for his family. The Registered Land Act's provisions on trusts did not apply in the...

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.