Municipal Board of Mombasa v Kala and Another (Civil Appeal No. 13 of 1955)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The Court held that a demolition notice issued by municipal officers without prior Board authority was invalid and incapable of ratification because the Board was required to exercise a judicial discretion before issuing such notice. By-law 127 was held intra vires as it dealt with structural safety rather than public health. The appeal was dismissed but damages were reduced from Sh. 20,000 to Sh. 2,000 as the trial judge applied the wrong principle in awarding special damages for diminution of site value without evidence.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed but damages substantially reduced from Sh. 20,000 to Sh. 2,000
Facts
In August 1951, a fire damaged a three-storey building in Mombasa. The Municipal Engineer served a notice under by-law 127 requiring repairs. In August 1952, the respondents purchased the property for Sh. 22,500 and proposed repair schemes. On 28 January 1953, the Municipal Engineer and Town Clerk, without prior Board authority, served a fresh notice requiring demolition within seven days. After the respondents' repair proposals were rejected, the Board demolished the building on 16 March 1953. The respondents sued for trespass. The trial judge found the notice invalid and awarded Sh. 20,000 damages, including for diminution of site value because only a one-storey building could now be erected whereas the demolished building had been three storeys.
Issues
- Whether a notice to demolish issued by servants of the Municipal Board without prior authority from the Board was valid.
- Whether such an invalid notice could be ratified by the Board after the fact.
- Whether by-law 127 of the Mombasa Municipality (Building and Sub-division) By-laws was ultra vires the Municipalities Ordinance and inconsistent with the Public Health Ordinance.
- What was the proper measure of damages for unlawful demolition of a building.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Damages reduced from Sh. 20,000 to Sh. 2,000.
- Each party to bear its own costs of the appeal.
- Order as to costs in the court below to stand.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (10)
- Mombasa Municipality (Building and Sub-division) By-laws by-law 127
- Municipalities Ordinance s.77
- Municipalities Ordinance s.132
- Public Health Ordinance s.118(1)
- Local Government (Municipalities) (Amendment No. 2) Ordinance (No. 54 of 1948) s.5
- Municipalities Ordinance s.10
- Local Government (Municipalities) Ordinance (No. 19 of 1928) s.33
- Municipalities Ordinance s.34
- Public Health Ordinance s.124
- Public Health Ordinance s.115
Cases cited (13)
- Cheetham v The Mayor of Manchester (1875) 32 LT 28
- Hopkins v Smethwick Local Board of Health (1890) 24 QBD 712
- Firth v Staines (1897) 2 QBD 70
- R v Chapman (1918) 2 KB 298
- St Leonards Vestry v Holmes (1885) 50 JC 132
- Bowyer Philpott & Payne Ltd v Mather (1919) 1 KB 419
- Limbe Town Council v Kirkcaldy (1946) 13 EACA 65
- Kruse v Johnson (1898) 78 TLR 647
- Jamal Pirbhai and others v Municipal Council of Nairobi (Civil Case No. 156 of 1940)
- Nalder v Ilford Corporation (1950) 2 AER 903
- Cook v Ward (1877) LR 2 CP 255
- Corsellis v London County Council (1908) 1 Ch 13
- Lyster v Goldwin (1839) 114 ER 57
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.