Evans Kamuyu Gathungu & 2 others v County Government of Kajiado [2018] KEELC 3600 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court at Ngong refused to stop Kajiado County's bus park, finding it sat on a road reserve, not the neighbours' land.
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 terminus is being built on a road reserve, not the suit lands, and the change-of-user point was not controverted
It was undisputed that the Defendant was constructing a bus terminus and that the Plaintiffs owned the suit lands. However, the Plaintiffs admitted the terminus area was a road reserve used by tenants for access, the project was for public interest and nearly complete, and the allegation of failure to conduct public participation under sections 91 and 95 of the County Government Act was not enough at this stage. The Defendant's change-of-user argument was not controverted.
Whether the Plaintiffs would suffer irreparable injury not adequately compensable by damages
No; the alleged injuries were speculative
The Plaintiffs held title deeds, and the bus park was being constructed on the road reserve in front of, not on, the suit lands. Photographs showed only stones and parked lorries. Claims that tenants would vacate were speculative, and per Nguruman, an irreparable injury is one that cannot be measured or adequately compensated by damages. No such injury was demonstrated.
Where the balance of convenience lies
It does not tilt in favour of the Plaintiffs
The bus park was being put up on a road reserve rather than the suit lands, and the project was set to benefit the public including the Plaintiffs. Stopping a nearly complete public project would therefore be inconvenient relative to the Plaintiffs' speculative claims of harm.
Legal principles established
#- The three Giella principles govern the grant of interlocutory injunctions
- A road reserve is public property and the County Government is vested with authority to manage it in its county
Court orders
#- 1.Dismissal of the Plaintiffs' application dated 15th November, 2017
- 2.Costs to be in the cause
- 3.Parties urged to comply with Order 11 and set the suit down for hearing as soon as possible
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 40 Rules 1, 2 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Evans Kamuyu Gathungu & 2 others v County Government of Kajiado [2018] KEELC 3600 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Chambers Summons dated 15th November, 2017 (suit not numbered in the judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/3600/eng@2018-04-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.