Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Kenya decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The court dismissed a trespass claim over land parcel CISMARA/OLCHORO/38, finding the dispute was really about an access road and boundary location.
Kombelel & another v Kosgei (Environment and Land Case E086 of 2026) [2026] KEMC 506 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Ruling)
The applicants failed to establish a prima facie case because the evidence showed an unresolved boundary dispute and competing claims to adjacent parcels, with no land registrar report to confirm trespass. Having failed the first Giella limb, and with the alleged harm being compensable by damages, the application for injunction was dismissed.
Source excerpt
Sadera v Nabaala & another (Environment and Land Case E028 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5235 (KLR) (6 August 2026) (Judgment)
The Plaintiff proved ownership of the land but failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that these Defendants personally trespassed upon, occupied, cultivated or leased the suit property between 1990 and 2017. Because wrongful occupation was not established, the claims for special damages, mesne profits and general damages collapsed, and the suit was dismissed with costs.
Source excerpt
Kipkuriat Farm Ltd v Ole Nabaala & 3 others; Nabaala (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Case E016 of 2021) [2026] KEHC 12728 (KLR) (6 August 2026) (Ruling)
The suit was improperly filed as a fresh original action because the dispute had already been handled by the Land Registrar, and any challenge to that decision or the process used had to be brought through the statutory appellate mechanism, not by instituting a new plaint in the Environment and Land Court. The preliminary objection failed on the narrow point that the Registrar's jurisdiction had been invoked, but the suit itself was still incompetent and struck out for bypassing the appeal route.
Source excerpt
Njege v Ngochine (Environment and Land Appeal E012 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 5309 (KLR) (5 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appellant failed to prove trespass or produce cogent evidence showing that the respondent had encroached beyond the fixed beacons. The Land Registrar's determination did not support the appellant's claim, and without proof of trespass there was no basis for a permanent injunction or general damages. The trial court correctly dismissed the suit, and the appeal likewise failed.
Source excerpt
Republic v Sub County Land Registrar at Kosele & another (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case E002 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 5084 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Judgment)
The Court held that although the Land Registrar has statutory powers over boundary disputes, the Applicant was in substance trying to reopen issues already determined in Oyugis SPMCC No. 74 of 2018 after a full hearing on the merits, and had not shown that the earlier judgment was appealed or set aside. Because judicial review is supervisory and not an appellate mechanism, mandamus could not be used to compel the Registrar to revisit and effectively undo matters previously litigated. Despite this, the Court ultimately treated the Registrar’s failure to act on the complaint and promised site v…
Source excerpt
Ochola v Odira & 4 others (Environment and Land Case E012 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 5064 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)
The suit was struck out because, on the pleadings, it was fundamentally a boundary dispute that had not been finally determined by the Land Registrar as required by Sections 18 and 19 of the Land Registration Act; the court therefore lacked jurisdiction to entertain claims for trespass, eviction, demolition and injunction premised on alleged encroachment.
Source excerpt
Mwaganda & 2 others (Both sued as the Personal Representatives of Francis Gambo Begambo (Deceased)) v Awadh (Civil Appeal E071 of 2023) [2026] KECA 1575 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal failed because the respondent’s earlier suit interrupted limitation time, so the subsequent suit was not statute-barred; the appellants did not prove adverse possession since they failed to tie their occupation and titles to the specific suit property and, in any event, their case was inconsistent with adverse possession because it rested on beneficiary/succession claims; and the trial court was entitled to uphold the respondent’s registered title and the consolidation of the suits, there being no demonstrated prejudice or proof of overlap defeating the respondent’s ownership.
Source excerpt
Kotonya v Nangurai & another (Environment and Land Case E047 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 5031 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)
The court held that although a boundary issue may exist, the applicant pleaded an independent cause of action in trespass and interference with possession, which placed the matter within the Environment and Land Court’s jurisdiction. On the material presented, the applicant showed a prima facie case, possible irreparable harm, and a balance of convenience favouring preservation of the status quo. The application for interim injunction therefore succeeded.
Source excerpt
Momanyi v Ochenge (Land Case Appeal E003 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5023 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal failed because the trial court was entitled to review its earlier order: the Land Registrar's report was already in existence on the record but had not been placed before the court when the preliminary objection was determined, which constituted an error apparent on the face of the record. Given that the suit had since progressed to hearing and no concrete prejudice was shown, the appellate court found no basis to interfere with the discretionary review order.
Source excerpt
Explore more
