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
In a double-titling dispute over Ruiru East/Juja East Block 2/3972, the court found the plaintiff failed to prove title or fraud and dismissed the suit with costs.
The court dismissed a land claim after finding the plaintiff failed to prove the alleged plots matched the suit property or that bonus plots were allocated.
The court dismissed an adverse possession claim over Nairobi/Block 263/1105 and 1106, holding time did not run for 12 years after prior litigation and a 2006 eviction judgment.
Otieno v Nyakongo (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E023 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 5365 (KLR) (31 August 2026) (Ruling)
The court dismissed an injunction and stay application as a collateral attempt to halt execution of an existing eviction decree, and awarded costs to the respondent.
Akoth v Mwatsami (Environment and Land Case 6 of 2018) [2026] KEELC 5250 (KLR) (7 August 2026) (Judgment)
The court found the charge document valid and accepted that the defendant’s father had executed the charge, but held that there was no evidence of service of the mandatory statutory notices, no proof of advertisement or public auction, and no evidence of valuation before sale. Because the due process for sale was not complied with, the alleged sale was irregular and the plaintiff’s claim failed while the counterclaim succeeded.
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
Horeria v Murigu & 3 others (Land Case E247 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 5249 (KLR) (6 August 2026) (Ruling)
The court found that the Applicant satisfied the Giella test because earlier court proceedings had already recognized his possessory and equitable rights, the alleged destruction and threats were uncontroverted, and the Respondents had not shown prejudice outweighed the Applicant’s risk of irreparable harm. However, because similar injunctive orders had already been granted in ELC E215 of 2026 and the issues overlapped, the court declined to vary the existing position, ordered the parties to maintain the status quo, and directed consolidation of the matters with ELC E215 of 2026 as the lead f…
Source excerpt
Siba (Suing in the Capacity of the Administratix in the Estate of Mohamud Siba) v Siba & 2 others (Environment and Land Appeal E025 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5158 (KLR) (4 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appellate court held that the trial magistrate misapprehended the evidence and the law by treating the absence of adoption of tribunal awards as defeating their evidential value, and by accepting the respondents' location letter without interrogating the root of registration. The court found that the appellant proved the estate's root of title, that the registration in the deceased respondent's father's name was fraudulent on the evidence, and that the respondents' occupation amounted to trespass. The appeal was allowed and the appellant granted declaratory, rectification, eviction, injun…
Source excerpt
Gathiru v Wanjiru (Land Case E588 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 5150 (KLR) (4 August 2026) (Ruling)
Although the applicant had a prima facie claim based on registration and the prior ruling that the property was not matrimonial property, the existence of a pending appeal and the family context required caution. The court preferred preservation of the property by maintaining the status quo and directing the parties to attempt settlement through alternative dispute resolution, rather than granting eviction or injunctive relief at this stage.
Source excerpt
Mwero & 2 others v Nyawa & 8 others (Environment and Land Case E136 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5317 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)
The court held that although the respondents' preliminary objection raised a jurisdictional issue grounded in the Land Adjudication Act and the pending adjudication committee process, the applicants had demonstrated special circumstances through evidence of prior allocation and alleged ongoing trespass and degradation. The objection was therefore only partially meritorious: the court sustained it to the extent of requiring exhaustion of the adjudication process, but preserved the land by imposing status quo and stay orders pending committee determination.
Source excerpt
Explore more
