A British national is seeking the possession of property worth over Sh10 million which his estranged Kenyan girlfriend is now treating as a gift and an apology for an aborted marriage.
Ms Catherine Nduku Muema says the property is now hers following the failed marriage with Mr Linn Alevander James De Nholm, who wants her stopped from dealing with the property pending the determination of an ownership dispute.
Court record show that the two met in Thika and started an intimate relationship with the prospect of a marriage, which did not materialise.
During their relationship, Mr De Nholm says he was open to the woman and he involved her in his investment plans. He says that he even purchased two vehicles and let the woman use them freely.
According to the court documents, in 2017, Ms Muema informed the foreigner of a property that was on sale in Mtwapa, Kilifi County. When they visited the area, Mr De Nholm got interested and purchased the property, a piece of land, for Sh2.5 million.
He bought the land to demonstrate to the woman that he was serious about their relationship and anticipated that they would get married. He included Ms Muema’s name in the sale agreement. Upon completion of the purchase, Mr De Nholm begun building a house on the property.
After a while, he broke up with the woman, reportedly because of mistrust. He then travelled back to Britain in June last year. When he came back to Kenya later that year, Ms Muema prevented him from accessing the property and locked his personal items in the house.
This action prompted the foreigner to write to Angela Omollo & Company Advocates, who requested for copies of the sale agreement, which had not been given to him. When he made inquiries at the Land Registry, he found out that the property had been registered in Ms Muema’s name. Mr De Nholm laments that the woman also registered all the motor vehicles in her name.
“The woman’s actions to register the properties in her name constitutes an illegality,” he told Mombasa Senior Principal Magistrate Francis Kyiambia, who is handling the dispute.
According to his documents filed in court, it was after the woman registered all the properties in her name that he realised that she was deceiving him that they would get married so as to persuade him to make investments with her.
Through his advocate, Collins Ondeng, the Briton says that he was ready to have the properties registered jointly in their names but in the light of her illegal conduct, he is no longer ready to have the woman registered as a joint owner of the property in dispute.
“She colluded with her advocate to commit fraud and misrepresentation with the intention of denying me my right of ownership of the property,” he said, insisting that he did not purchased the property as an apology to Ms Muema.
On her part, Ms Muema acknowledges that the two were in a relationship, which they intended to legalise into marriage.
“However, I discovered that Mr James was legally married to another Kenyan woman,” she explained.
Ms Muema further told the court that it was the foreigner who convinced her to move to Mtwapa, where he claimed he would be comfortable and that he would visit whenever he was in the country for holidays. She said he kept but on some occasions he would leave and visit his undisclosed friends.
She claimed that in one instance, Mr De Nholm left in a huff to Uganda to, allegedly, visit his other girlfriend, whom he was cohabiting with but gave the excuse that he wanted to acquire a Ugandan passport.
“He apologised for his marital lies and as a sign of sincerity, he promised to build me a house but did not fulfil the promise as he left, leaving me in an incomplete structure which I continued to build,” she said.
Ms Muema denied showing the Briton any property to purchase, saying she had told her that he was not interested in owning property in Kenya as he was a foreigner. She added that she purchased the property and had it transferred to her name by the seller upon completing the purchase. According to her, she is the owner of the property because she bought the architectural plan and finalised its construction.
In February last year, the woman claimed the Briton returned to the country and requested to visit her house to greet her, only to turn violent with threats of eviction.
“He did not buy me any vehicle. I did not deceive him, he was the one who lied to me that he was in a position to marry me when he knew so well that he was married and was cohabiting with another woman,” said Ms Muema.
She says that the man’s partial contribution towards the purchase of the suit premises was an apology to her and, therefore, he should be stopped from claiming ownership.
The court has issued an injunction preserving the property until the ownership dispute between the two is resolved.
“For avoidance of doubt, Ms Mueni is restrained from disposing the suit property. Mr James on the other hand is restrained from interfering with the woman’s occupation of the property. Those orders shall subsists until the main suit is determined or until further orders of the court,” said the magistrate.
