Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in the judgment· [2018] KEELC 3665 (KLR)

James Gicheru Mathenge v Joseph Mwangi Wakaba & John Nguri [2018] KEELC 3665 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
20 March 2018
964 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court refused to evict occupants before trial, ruling that eviction orders are final relief reserved for the clearest of cases.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Nakuru (D. O. Ohungo, J) disposed of the plaintiff's Notice of Motion dated 18th May 2017, brought under Order 40 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 and Sections 68 and 69 of the Land Registration Act. The plaintiff, who claimed allocation of Elementaita Trading Centre Plot No. 644 by the County Council of Nakuru, sought eviction and demolition of structures erected by the 1st and 2nd defendants, together with police security to enforce the orders. The defendants opposed through a replying affidavit of the 2nd defendant, casting doubt on the existence of the suit property, questioning the plaintiff's letter of allotment, and asserting that the plaintiff had attempted to fence un-surveyed land set aside for public use. The court found that although prayer 2 of the application had sought an injunction pending hearing of the application, that prayer was spent and no application for an injunction pending the suit was before it. The eviction and demolition orders sought were in substance a mandatory injunction, which the law permits at the interlocutory stage only in the clearest of cases or upon special circumstances, per Lucy Wangui Gachara v Minudi Okemba Lore. Since the plaint reserved vacant possession for trial, granting the prayers would prematurely determine the suit. The application was dismissed with costs to the defendants.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether an order of eviction and demolition could be granted at the interlocutory stage

Holding

No - the relief sought was a mandatory injunction reserved for trial, and no special circumstances justified its grant at the interlocutory stage

Reasoning

The court held that the eviction and demolition orders sought amounted to a mandatory injunction. Citing Lucy Wangui Gachara v Minudi Okemba Lore, such injunctions should be granted only in the clearest of cases or where special circumstances exist. Since the plaint itself sought vacant possession at trial, granting the prayers would prematurely determine the suit, and the material before the court did not establish special circumstances.

p. 2
02

Whether the court could determine the question of an interlocutory injunction

Holding

No - prayer 2 was spent and no application for an injunction pending the suit was before the court

Reasoning

The court noted that although prayer 2 sought an injunction pending hearing of the application, there was no separate application for an injunction pending the suit itself. Since the court can only decide matters placed before it and that prayer was marked spent, there was nothing to determine on the issue of an interlocutory injunction.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • A mandatory injunction at the interlocutory stage should not be granted absent special circumstances or only in the clearest of cases
  • A court can only decide on matters placed before it and cannot grant relief not applied for

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Notice of Motion dated 18th May 2017 dismissed with costs to the defendants
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 40 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 and Sections 68 and 69 of the Land Registration Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "James Gicheru Mathenge v Joseph Mwangi Wakaba & John Nguri [2018] KEELC 3665 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/3665/eng@2018-03-20

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