Registered Trustees of Sheik Bayed Bin Sultan Al Nahyan v Pelican Engineering & Construction Company Limited & 4 others (Environment and Land Case 639 of 2015) [2024] KEELC 6534 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nairobi court cancelled two competing titles over prime Upper Hill land, holding neither owner proved their title was lawfully acquired.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of the plaintiff's allocation and title
Invalid - the allotment preceded the surrender of the mother title, there was no application for allocation, and the subdivision/survey process was unprocedural
The allotment letter dated 22.1.1990 was issued while the mother title L.R. 209/6525 remained registered in favour of Kenya Railways, so the land was not unalienated government land under section 3 of the repealed Government Lands Act. No application for allocation was proved, the surrender was irregularly registered without endorsement on the title, and no evidence of planning and survey preceded the allocation.
Validity of the 1st defendant's title
Invalid and fraudulent - the 1st defendant had no evidence of an application, no account of the root of title, and its allotment letter bore an L.R. number for a parcel that did not yet exist
The allotment letter of 5.1.1991 already carried L.R. No. 209/11552 with a deed plan dated 15.2.1992, yet there was no explanation of how the parcel was birthed. The title was only issued 22 years later in 2013/2015 with no explanation. There was no acceptance of the allotment or payment of stand premium. These defects point to fraudulent and corrupt acquisition.
Effect of absence of evidence by the 5th defendant
The court could not pronounce on the 5th defendant's claim because it tendered no evidence despite pleading it
Whatever is pleaded must be proved by evidence. The 5th defendant's claim in ELC 302 of 2015 had been stayed by consent and the 5th defendant called no witnesses in this suit. Its submissions were disregarded because submissions cannot take the place of evidence.
Good faith and disclosure in litigation
The plaintiff acted in bad faith by filing suit without joining the 5th defendant which had already sued it over the same land
The plaintiff was sued by the 5th defendant in ELC 305 of 2015 in April 2015 yet filed this suit in July 2015 without disclosing or joining the 5th defendant, only amending its pleadings in October 2020. Parties must act in utmost good faith and make full disclosure of material facts.
Legal principles established
#- When a registered proprietor's root of title is under challenge, the proprietor must go beyond the instrument of title and prove the legality of the acquisition
- Titled land is not available for allocation; allocation of land must trace to unalienated government/public land following a procedurally valid process
- Where two or more titles exist over the same land, the court investigates from the root; the title conforming to procedure and tracing its root without a break is upheld
- The acquisition of title must be assessed by the process of acquisition, not merely the end result
Court orders
#- 1.The plaintiff's claim is hereby dismissed
- 2.The Counterclaim of the 1st defendant is hereby dismissed
- 3.The unlawful titles issued to the plaintiff and the 1st defendant in respect of the suit parcel L.R. 209/11552 are hereby cancelled
- 4.The suit land parcel L.R. 209/11552 shall revert to the Kenya Railways Corporation or to its lawful beneficiaries
- 5.The consent order given on 3.3.2020 staying the suit 302/2015 is discharged and the said matter is to proceed
- 6.Each party shall bear their own costs of this suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2) of the Constitution - Environment and Land Court jurisdiction over land disputes
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (5)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Muchina v Mbuuri & 2 others (Environment and Land Appeal E021 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 2683 (KLR)[2026] KEELC 2683 (KLR)6 May 2026
- Kandie v Kibe & 6 others (Environment and Land Case 240 of 2018) [2026] KEELC 1376 (KLR)[2026] KEELC 1376 (KLR)19 Feb 2026distinguished
- Shah v Kulmia & 4 others (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 201 of 2007) [2025] KEELC 3073 (KLR)[2025] KEELC 3073 (KLR)2 Apr 2025followed
- Kayoyo Investment Limited v Nesclay Limited & 3 others; Nesclay Limited (Plaintiff to the Counterclaim); Kayoyo Investment Limited & 6 others (Defendant to the Counterclaim) (Environment & Land Case E006 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 3027 (KLR)[2025] KEELC 3027 (KLR)2 Apr 2025followed
- Michieka v Gikandi & 6 others; Kenya Revenue Authority (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 446 of 2013) [2024] KEELC 7243 (KLR)[2024] KEELC 7243 (KLR)30 Oct 2024followed
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Registered Trustees of Sheik Bayed Bin Sultan Al Nahyan v Pelican Engineering & Construction Company Limited & 4 others (Environment and Land Case 639 of 2015) [2024] KEELC 6534 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). ELC Case No. 639 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/6534/eng@2024-10-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.