Bunde v Owuor & 3 others
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ended a decade-old land dispute by adopting the Land Registrar's boundary report as its final judgment, with no costs awarded.
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's report filed on 10th February 2023 finally determined the issues in the dispute
- 2.Whether judgment should be entered in terms of the Land Registrar's report
- 3.Who should bear the costs of the suit
Key legal issues
#Whether the Land Registrar's report finally determined the dispute
Yes - the report was generated in accordance with sections 18 and 19 of the Land Registration Act and resolved the dispute, so judgment was entered in its terms
The court noted the report was produced pursuant to a consent order directing the Land Registrar and surveyor to file a report further to orders made in Kisii HCC No. 119 of 1991. The report found the plaintiff had subdivided and sold his entire land, the original parcel no longer exists, his interest on the ground was extinguished, and the orders could not be implemented having been overtaken by events. Both counsel had no objection to adopting the report.
Costs of the suit
Each party to bear their own costs given the amicable resolution
The defendants' counsel sought costs; the plaintiff's counsel urged each party to bear own costs in light of the amicable determination. The court was guided by section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Act, the proviso to section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and the Samuel Kamau Macharia decision on award of costs, and held costs inappropriate.
Legal principles established
#- A boundary/determination report properly generated under sections 18 and 19 of the Land Registration Act can finally determine a land dispute and be adopted as judgment
- Litigation must come to an end, particularly in aged suits
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered in terms of the Homa Bay Land Registrar's report filed in court on 10th February 2023
- 2.Each party to bear their own costs of the suit
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Environment and Land Court jurisdiction under the Environment and Land Court Act, 2015 (sections 13 and 18-19 Land Registration Act invoked for boundary determination)
Relief refused
#Costs of the suit sought by the defendants
Parties resolved their issues amicably, making an award of costs inappropriate
Costs
Each party to bear their own costs of the suit
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.
A fortiori, Judgement be and is hereby entered in terms of HomaBay Land Registrar's report filed in court on 10th February 2023 as stated in paragraph 4(a) to (f) hereinabove.
Indeed, parties have resolved their issues amicably thus, award of costs would be inappropriate herein. So, parties to bear their own costs of this suit.
This suit is aged ten years. The cardinal principal is that litigation has to come to an end.
I, would applaud the parties for resolving their disputes in line with Article 159(2) (b) and (c) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010.
Issues in the judgment
#Date contradiction: plaint dated 19 December 2023 but judgment delivered 8 November 2023 and suit transferred in 2019
Defence dated 27th November 2015 predates the suit as described
Statute years given inconsistently
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Bunde v Owuor & 3 others", Case Analysis (2023). Environment & Land Case 45 of 2022 (Formerly Migori ELC Civil No. 11 of 2019 and Homabay CMC Land Case No. 62 of 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/21448/eng@2023-11-08
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.