Alice Kariuki v Telcom Kenya Limited; Land Registrar Nakuru(Intended Defendant/Respondent) [2020] KEELC 1332 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court ordered a caution removed from a Nakuru land title, confirming a failed injunction ruling can override a caution and that the Land Registrar need not be sued.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Land Registrar Nakuru should be enjoined as a party to the suit
- 2.Whether the caution registered by the plaintiff on 25th May 2016 over L.R No. Nakuru Municipality Block 6/29 should be removed pending hearing and determination of the suit
Key legal issues
#Whether the caution should be withdrawn
The caution was refused sustenance because the facts underlying it were the same facts on which the plaintiff failed to obtain an injunction in the unappealed ruling of 16th May 2017
The caution and the injunction application rested on the same sale agreement and alleged purchaser's interest. The Court had found the allegations unsubstantiated and dismissed the injunction, and that ruling was not appealed. The dismissal, therefore, superseded the registration of the caution and there was no basis to sustain it.
Whether the Land Registrar should be joined
Joinder refused; the Registrar is not a necessary party
The Registrar acted under his statutory mandate in registering the caution; the affected parties are the plaintiff and defendant, either of whom may apply for withdrawal or extension of the caution. The Registrar would be bound by any court order, so joinder is unnecessary.
Legal principles established
#- A party affected by a caution may apply to Court for its withdrawal without enjoining the Land Registrar, who will be bound by the order made
- A court ruling dismissing an interlocutory injunction, if unappealed, supersedes a caution registered on the same facts
Court orders
#- 1.The defendant's application allowed in terms of prayer (3) of the Notice of Motion dated 20th December 2018, i.e. removal/withdrawal of the caution registered against title Number Nakuru Municipality Block 6/29
- 2.No order for costs; each party to bear their own costs of the application
- 3.Joinder of the Land Registrar Nakuru as a party refused
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 1A, 1B & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, Section 73(1) of the Land Registration Act, 2012 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Relief refused
#Joinder of the Land Registrar Nakuru County as a party to the suit
The Registrar was merely executing his statutory mandate and is not a necessary party; he would be bound by any order the Court makes
Costs of the application
The court made no order for costs
Costs
Each party will bear their own costs of the application.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Accordingly, I find this a proper and fitting case for the Court to order the withdrawal of the caution registered against title Number Nakuru Municipality Block 6/29.
The order of the Court dismissing the plaintiff's application for injunction superseded the act of the Land Registrar of registering the caution.
The Land Registrar is not a necessary party in the proceedings and need not to be enjoined.
I make no order for costs of the application. Each party will bear their own costs of the application.
Issues in the judgment
#Judgment refers to 'the plaintiff' with both male and female pronouns, and the supporting affidavit is by Robert K Irungu described as the defendant's Legal Advisor, leaving party identities imprecise
Application allowed 'in terms of prayer (3)' although prayer (3) in the quoted motion is the costs prayer; the substantive relief is prayer (2) (removal of caution)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Alice Kariuki v Telcom Kenya Limited; Land Registrar Nakuru(Intended Defendant/Respondent) [2020] KEELC 1332 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Notice of Motion dated 20th December 2018 (suit over L.R No. Nakuru Municipality Block 6/29 and LR No. 7935/5 Eburu). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/1332/eng@2020-09-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.