Felistus Muliro Nanjala v Robert Koech & 2 others [2016] KEELC 997 (KLR)

The 9.6.2005 order was conditional on the suit being fixed for hearing by 31.12.2005. However, on 30.11.2005 the parties appeared before the judge and by consent fixed the case for hearing on 8.2.2006, agreeing the injunction orders would remain in force. By fixing the hearing date the applicant met her obligation, and the injunction was to lapse on determination of the suit, so it was in existence at the date of the alleged contempt.

The court found there was evidence the plaintiff's house was deliberately destroyed with intent to inflict damage and evict the occupants. The respondent's claim that the structures housed a brothel and that the demolition was a government operation against illicit brews was unsupported; he produced no evidence that the plaintiff was ever charged with operating a brothel. As a litigant aware of the order, he took advantage of the presidential directive to disobey it.

Having found serious contempt, the court imposed a custodial sentence of 30 days with an alternative fine, reflecting the seriousness with which courts treat disobedience of court orders while departing from the six-month sentence and Kshs.1,000,000 fine sought by the applicant.