Ibara Ngari & another Ibara v Lucas Mwaniki Mari [2018] KEELC 3110 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Plaintiffs established a prima facie case with a probability of success
They did not; the claimed 1995 purchase agreement was vague and the claim of 22 years' possession was improbable given the Defendant bought the land in 2015
The sale agreement did not specify the acreage or particular parcel, did not provide for possession pending completion, and there was no evidence the purchase price was paid in full. The claim of 22 years' occupation with the Defendant's full knowledge was untenable because the Defendant only purchased the suit property in 2015. No photographs or expert reports supported the alleged possession and development, and the vendor denied the Plaintiffs' claims.
Whether the Plaintiffs' non-disclosure at the ex-parte stage disentitled them to equitable relief
Yes; they did not make full and faithful disclosure of material facts, creating a false impression of the Defendant as an absentee owner
The Plaintiffs obtained ex-parte interim orders without disclosing that both parties had bought separate parcels from the same vendor and shared a common boundary, creating a false impression that the Defendant was an absentee landowner suddenly threatening eviction. Relying on Owners of Motor Vessel 'Lillian S' v Caltex Oil, the court held that material non-disclosure disentitles a party to an equitable remedy regardless of the merits.
Legal principles established
#- The principles for the grant of an interlocutory injunction in Kenya are those in Giella v Cassman Brown: prima facie case with probability of success, irreparable damage not compensable by damages, and balance of convenience if in doubt
- A party seeking an equitable remedy, especially ex-parte, must make full and faithful disclosure of all material facts; material non-disclosure disentitles the party regardless of merits
Court orders
#- 1.The Plaintiffs' notice of motion dated 6th September 2017 is dismissed with costs
- 2.The interim orders in place are discharged
- 3.The prayer for an order of inhibition is declined
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 37 of the Civil Procedure Rules, sections 37 and 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act (Cap 22) and section 28(h) of the Land Registration Act 2012; interim relief under section 28(1) of the Land Registration Act, 2012, Order 51 Rule 10 Civil Procedure Rules and section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ibara Ngari & another Ibara v Lucas Mwaniki Mari [2018] KEELC 3110 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Embu ELC Originating Summons (with Notice of Motion dated 6th September 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/3110/eng@2018-05-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.