Ooro v Okelloh (Land Case Appeal E002 of 2024) [2024] KEELC 7390 (KLR) (7 November 2024) (Judgment)
- Court
- Environment & Land Court
- Case number
- 7390
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 7390 (KLR)
- Decided
- 7 November 2024
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeLand Case AppealPostureAppeal from the judgment of SPM hon. J.P. NandiCoramAY KOROSS, J
Holding
The learned trial magistrate did not err in finding the respondent was not a trespasser.
Facts
The appellant, Chresetia Were Ooro, claimed trespass against the respondent, John Okoth Okelloh, over land parcel no. Sakwa/Nyawita/7832 registered in her name but allegedly occupied by the respondent. The respondent denied the claim and asserted he had purchased the land from Pius Achiego Adede in 1982.
Issues
- Whether the learned trial magistrate erred in finding the respondent was not a trespasser.
- Whether the learned trial magistrate erred in finding the respondent was a trespasser.
Reasoning
The respondent had a right of entry and was not in possession of the land by entry, thus not a trespasser.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- The respondent’s title over the suit property is not affected by the appellant's claim of trespass.
Authorities cited
Legislation (4)
- Land Act 2016
- Limitation of Actions Act
- Trespass Act
- Land Registration Act
Cases cited (1)
- Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England: Book III: of Private Wrongs (2016)
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.
Loading judgment…