Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedELC Cause No. 232 of 2017 (formerly Nakuru HCC No. 2 of 2011)· [2018] KEELC 2239 (KLR)

Oloolaimuita Lodge Co. Ltd v Siana Maasai Mara Conservancy & 3 others [2018] KEELC 2239 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
23 July 2018
524 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Narok court permanently barred a conservancy from charging entry fees or blocking access to private lodge land in Kenya.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff, Oloolaimuita Lodge Co. Ltd, brought an amended plaint dated 20th January 2011 seeking permanent injunctions restraining the defendants from erecting barriers blocking access to its property (LR No. 16216 in Narok County) and from demanding or enforcing entry charges of USD 40 against it and its visitors, which it characterised as illegal. The defendants filed a defence denying the allegations, contending that the land was trust/community land rendering the plaintiff's lease null and void, and asserting they had not compelled the plaintiff or its visitors to buy tickets. At the hearing the plaintiff called two witnesses; the defendants did not appear, did not testify and produced no documents. Holding the plaintiff's testimony unchallenged and uncontroverted, the court found the case proved on a balance of probabilities and the conditions for injunction satisfied. The court entered judgment for the plaintiff, issuing two permanent injunctions - one against demanding or enforcing entry charges and one against erecting barriers and stopping access to LR No. 16216 - and declared all charges and levies demanded by the 1st and 2nd defendants from the plaintiff or its visitors illegal, null and void. Costs were awarded to the plaintiff. Judgment was delivered at Narok on 23rd July 2018 by Mohammed Noor Kullow, Judge, with neither parties nor advocates present.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the plaintiff proved its entitlement to permanent injunctions against entry charges and barriers

Holding

The plaintiff proved its case on a balance of probabilities and satisfied the conditions for the grant of injunctions

Reasoning

The plaintiff called two witnesses in support of its claim that the defendants were demanding USD 40 from visitors and erecting barriers to its property. The defendants, despite filing a defence, did not appear at the hearing, did not testify and produced no documents. Their failure left the plaintiff's testimony unchallenged and uncontroverted, and the court entered judgment for the plaintiff on the amended plaint's prayers.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • Unchallenged and uncontroverted evidence, where the defendant fails to appear or testify, is sufficient to prove a case on a balance of probabilities
  • Demanding entry charges and blocking access to private land is illegal and may be restrained by permanent injunction

Court orders

#
  1. 1.A permanent injunction restraining the defendants from demanding or enforcing entry charges against the plaintiffs or their visitors to the property known as LR No. 16216 situated within Narok County
  2. 2.A permanent injunction restraining the defendants from erecting barriers and stopping access to the plaintiffs' property known as LR No. 16216
  3. 3.A declaration that all charges and levies demanded by the 1st and 2nd defendants from the plaintiffs or their visitors are illegal, null and void
  4. 4.Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff
Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court under the Environment and Land Court Act (suit transferred from Nakuru HCC No. 2 of 2011)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Oloolaimuita Lodge Co. Ltd v Siana Maasai Mara Conservancy & 3 others [2018] KEELC 2239 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). ELC Cause No. 232 of 2017 (formerly Nakuru HCC No. 2 of 2011). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/2239/eng@2018-07-23

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.