Stefano Poli v Ashiono Donald Shibachi [2017] KEELC 2382 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Prima facie case and propriety of restraining the Respondent personally
No injunction issued; the Respondent was not personally shown to have barred access, and the guards acted as employees of the non-joined Management Company
The court applied the Giella principles and the Mrao definition of a prima facie case. Although the Applicant owned a quarter share, the premises were managed by Mangos Village Limited since 2011, the guards acted for the company, and the Respondent did not personally bar entry. The proper defendant, the company, was not a party, so restraining orders against the Respondent personally could not issue.
Duty of a new entrant to communicate with the management company
A recent purchaser should have communicated with the Managing Company before sending a lorry for renovation
The court found the Applicant was a very recent owner in a compound with shared facilities under one common entrance. The security guards were justified in seeking to establish where the goods were destined given the absence of prior introduction or communication with the management company, and the misunderstanding was of the Applicant's own making.
Legal principles established
#- Where the alleged interference with property access was carried out by employees of a management company acting in its mandate, restraining orders cannot issue against an individual director in proceedings in which the company has not been enjoined
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 19th September 2016 is dismissed with costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over the suit property (Plot No. CR 22104 Kilifi); interim relief sought under the court's inherent powers pending hearing of the suit
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Stefano Poli v Ashiono Donald Shibachi [2017] KEELC 2382 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Application dated 19th September 2016 (suit at Malindi). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/2382/eng@2017-07-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.