Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedMachakos ELC case (Application dated 18th November, 2017)· [2018] KEELC 4721 (KLR)

John Kyalo Mulinge v Julius Kimeu Mutua & 15 others [2018] KEELC 4721 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
23 January 2018
2,991 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Machakos Environment and Land Court found most of twenty Defendants in contempt for subdividing land despite court orders, and ordered their arrest for sentencing.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Machakos (O.A. Angote J) determined two prayers in the Plaintiff's application dated 18th November 2017: whether summons should issue, and whether the Defendants should be cited for contempt of the court's orders of 27th July 2016 (status quo over parcel Masii/Kithangathini/224) and 22nd September 2017 (injunction against selling or alienating the suit land). The Plaintiff deponed that despite the orders, the Defendants sub-divided the land into parcels 957-966, distributed them amongst themselves and third parties, obtained title deeds for parcels 964, 969 and 970, and invaded the land to harvest sand. The 2nd Defendant denied service, contended that three Defendants were deceased, that the status quo order lacked a penal notice, and that sub-division had commenced before the order. The court found the 1st and 2nd Defendants were personally served, noting their failure to cross-examine the process-server. For the 3rd to 16th Defendants, personal service was not proved, but following Shimmers Plaza Ltd v National Bank of Kenya Ltd, knowledge of the orders through their advocate sufficed, the status quo order having been entered with that advocate's consent. Applying the Shimmers Plaza definition of status quo, the court held the formal sub-division commenced after the order, and all Defendants except the deceased 10th, 11th and 16th were in contempt. The court ordered the OCS Masii Police Station to arrest the contemnors for mitigation and sentence, and awarded costs of the application to the Plaintiff.

Key legal issues

#
01

Service of the court orders on the 1st and 2nd Defendants

Holding

Both were duly served as deponed in the Affidavit of Service

Reasoning

The 2nd Defendant admitted the process-server knew his residence from prior service and did not summon him for cross-examination. The 1st Defendant did not deny meeting the process-server at Java Cafe, Re-Insurance Plaza, nor explain his whereabouts on the alleged service date, nor deny working at the Budget Office, Office of the President on 1st October, 2017. The court was satisfied both were served with the two orders.

p. 4
02

Whether lack of personal service and absence of a penal notice defeats contempt

Holding

No; knowledge of the order, including through the party's advocate, suffices

Reasoning

Relying on Shimmers Plaza Ltd v National Bank of Kenya Ltd, the court held that the law has moved from strict personal service with penal notice to knowledge of the order. The 27th July 2016 status quo order was entered with the consent of the Defendants' advocate, and the 22nd September 2017 order was served on the advocates. The advocate was under a legal obligation to inform the clients; whether he did so was inconsequential for contempt.

p. 5
03

Whether the Defendants breached the status quo and injunction orders

Holding

Yes; sub-division, registration and issuance of titles after the orders constituted contempt

Reasoning

As at 27th July 2016 the suit land had not been formally sub-divided. The Mutation form was prepared on 21st June 2017 and lodged on 31st August 2017, with titles for parcels 964, 969 and 970 issued thereafter. The court held the formal sub-division commenced after the order, and even if it had commenced earlier, the process should have stopped once the order was made. Nobody stated who caused the sub-division, so all Defendants except the deceased were held in contempt.

p. 6
04

Service on the 3rd to 16th Defendants

Holding

No evidence of personal service, but contempt still established via their advocate's knowledge

Reasoning

The process-server was vague on individual service and two of those purportedly served were already dead. However, their advocate was aware of the orders: the status quo order was made with the advocate's consent and the 22nd September 2017 order was served on and stamped by the advocates. On the Shimmers Plaza principle, the advocate's knowledge sufficed for contempt purposes.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Knowledge of a court order by a party or their advocate suffices to prove service for contempt purposes, dispensing with personal service with penal notice
  • Status quo means the existing state of things as at the time the order is made; any ongoing transaction must freeze pending discharge of the order
  • A party who does not summon the process-server for cross-examination on his Affidavit of Service cannot later dispute the service

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Except the 10th, 11th and 16th Defendants, all the Defendants are found to have been in contempt of the orders of 27th July, 2016 and 22nd September, 2017
  2. 2.The Officer Commanding Masii Police Station to arrest all the Defendants except the 10th, 11th and 16th Defendants (deceased) and present them to court for Mitigation and Sentence
  3. 3.The Defendants to pay the costs of the Application

Authorities

#

Cases cited (2)

  • Shimmers Plaza Limited vs. National Bank of Kenya Limited
    (2015) eKLR
  • Refrigeration and Kitchen Utensils Ltd vs. Gulabched Popatlal Shah & Another
    Civil Application No. 39 of 1990
Jurisdiction invoked
Contempt jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over disobedience of its own orders

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "John Kyalo Mulinge v Julius Kimeu Mutua & 15 others [2018] KEELC 4721 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Machakos ELC case (Application dated 18th November, 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/4721/eng@2018-01-23

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