Isaiah Wanyonyi & 29 others v County Government of Trans Nzoia [2018] KEELC 1550 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Kitale court refused an injunction against Trans Nzoia County because the landowners produced too few details to link the county to demolitions, but froze all activity on the land.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Prima facie case
The plaintiffs did not establish a prima facie case against the defendant because the link to the demolitions rested on conclusory statements, the defendant denied any eviction resolution, and the identity of the allotted land with the land on the ground was not shown
The court weighed the 1st plaintiff's sworn statements against the County Secretary's affidavit, which denied any county resolution to evict and described lapsed allotment offers by the Settlement Fund Trustees. Without maps or plans, the plaintiffs could not show the allotted parcels matched the suit land, leaving the application beset by a dearth of details.
Irreparable loss
No irreparable loss incapable of compensation by damages was demonstrated on the same evidence
Because the plaintiffs failed on the first limb of the injunction test, the court found the alleged risk of the land being degraded or wasted insufficient to establish irreparable harm. The evidence did not demonstrate that the defendant would dispossess the plaintiffs in a way damages could not remedy.
Balance of convenience
The balance of convenience favoured maintaining the status quo, with no development by either party, pending trial
Although the injunction failed on the first two limbs, the court invoked the third limb to preserve the position of both parties. It restrained both sides from carrying out any activity, development or acts of waste on the suit land until the suit is heard and determined.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant for a temporary injunction must establish a prima facie case with a probability of success and irreparable loss incapable of compensation by damages; conclusory statements unsupported by particulars or evidence of identity of the suit land will not suffice.
Court orders
#- 1.Neither party shall carry out any activity or any development or any acts of waste on the suit land pending the hearing and determination of this suit (status quo maintained)
- 2.Each party shall bear its own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Environment and Land Court jurisdiction over land disputes (original application for temporary injunction)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Isaiah Wanyonyi & 29 others v County Government of Trans Nzoia [2018] KEELC 1550 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Application dated 19/1/2018 in a suit at the Environment and Land Court, Kitale. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/1550/eng@2018-05-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.