SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Attorney General v Emfil Limited & 417 others (Civil Appeal 37 of 2020) [2023] KECA 428 (KLR) (14 April 2023) (Judgment)

[2023] KECA 428 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
428
Citation
[2023] KECA 428 (KLR)
Decided
14 April 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from a ruling of the Environment and Land CourtCoramA. Omollo, JW LESSIT, Madan, NYAMWEYA
Holding

The appeal is partially successful, setting aside the trial court's orders striking out the defenses of 154th to 318th Defendants and entering judgment for Emfil Limited against them. The orders striking out the defenses of 1st to 7th Defendants are upheld.

Facts

Emfil Limited filed a plaint claiming that 1st to 8th Defendants illegally issued titles and approved developments in Kwale/RamisiKinondo/Squatter Settlement Scheme, which was illegally created from Emfil Limited's land. Other 412 Defendants benefited illegally from the scheme and trespassed on Emfil Limited's land.

Issues

  1. Ownership of the land
  2. Validity of the settlement scheme

Reasoning

The court determined that Emfil Limited's ownership of the land was conclusively established by previous court decisions, and the settlement scheme was created on land belonging to Emfil Limited.

Outcome

Partial success

Orders

  • Setting aside the orders striking out the defenses of 154th to 318th Defendants
  • Upholding the orders striking out the defenses of 1st to 7th Defendants
  • Ordering each party to bear their costs of the applications and appeal

Remedies

  • Judgment for Emfil Limited against 154th to 318th Defendants
  • Judgment for Emfil Limited against 1st to 7th Defendants

Authorities cited

Cases cited (2)
  • Emfil Limited v Registrar of Titles Mombasa [2014] eKLR
  • Emfil Limited v Hamisi Mwalimu & 9 others, HCCC No 181 of 2007
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case