Paul Kipchumba Serem v William Chepkwony [2014] KEELC 468 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ordered police to arrest a man who ignored a land injunction, proving court orders carry real consequences.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Disobedience of a subsisting injunction order
The defendant, though duly served with the injunction order issued on 7 January 2014, disobeyed it by obstructing ploughing and ploughing the suit land, warranting committal proceedings.
The court examined the affidavit of service of the process server and found that the defendant was duly served with the injunction order on 9 January 2014. The plaintiff deponed that on 11 January 2014 the defendant, armed with a knife and rungu, stopped the ploughing, and that on 18 January 2014 the defendant himself ploughed the land. The defendant had neither entered appearance nor responded. On that uncontroverted material the court concluded the order had been disobeyed.
Legal principles established
#- Where an injunction order is duly served and disobeyed, the court may order the arrest of the disobedient party to be dealt with for contempt under Order 40 Rule 3.
Court orders
#- 1.The OCS Moiben Police Station to proceed and arrest the defendant
- 2.The defendant to be presented before the court, after which the court will mete out the appropriate punishment in his presence
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 40 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 29 of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2011
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Paul Kipchumba Serem v William Chepkwony [2014] KEELC 468 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Not stated in judgment (application dated 23 January 2014 arising from suit filed 18 December 2013 over LR No. 8304). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2014/468/eng@2014-02-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.