Samuel Kanogo Ritho & another v Liscom Computers and Accessories Limited [2018] KEELC 3908 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nairobi court froze all dealings on disputed land because the owners held a court decree, executed transfer, and certificate of lease proving registered ownership.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Plaintiffs demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success for purposes of a temporary injunction
Yes. The Plaintiffs produced the plaint, decree and transfer of lease executed by the Deputy Registrar in HCCC No. 1048 of 1996, plus a certificate of lease issued on 30/12/2005, establishing registered ownership.
The 1st Plaintiff obtained a declaratory judgment that the Defendant held the property in trust for him, with an order that the Defendant execute transfer documents failing which the Deputy Registrar would execute the transfer. The transfer and certificate of lease issued on 30/12/2005 were produced. The Defendant filed no response to the application and its preliminary objection was dismissed. On this material the court found a prima facie case with a probability of success.
Whether an interlocutory restraint over the Suit Property was necessary
Yes. The court held it necessary to restrain the Defendant from dealing with the Suit Property pending hearing and determination of the suit, and allowed Prayer 3.
Given the Plaintiffs' registered ownership and the Defendant's unsupported claim of acquisition from Sam Asiligwa Luseno, dealing with the property pending trial would prejudice the Plaintiffs. The Defendant did not file any response, so the unchallenged material supported granting the injunction and costs to the Plaintiffs.
Legal principles established
#- A plaintiff who obtains a declaratory judgment and a transfer executed by the Deputy Registrar pursuant to a decree, evidenced by a certificate of lease, demonstrates a prima facie case over the property
Court orders
#- 1.Prayer 3 of the application dated 20/2/2017 allowed - temporary injunction restraining the Defendant or its agents from trespassing, dealing, developing, constructing, entering, subdividing, leasing, charging, transferring, selling or in any manner dealing with Nairobi Block 94/3 pending hearing and determination of the suit
- 2.Plaintiffs awarded the costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction to grant interim relief pending trial (statutory basis not cited in the extract)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Samuel Kanogo Ritho & another v Liscom Computers and Accessories Limited [2018] KEELC 3908 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in the extract (interim application dated 20/2/2017 in a suit over Nairobi Block 94/3). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/3908/eng@2018-02-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.