Peter Thuita Kariuki & 3 others v Kenya Rural Roads Authority [2019] KEELC 163 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court dismissed residents' bid to halt a road project because they lacked evidence and had never formally requested the tender information.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Prima facie case for interlocutory injunction
The Applicant failed to establish a prima facie case with probability of success; no evidence showed the property in dispute was in danger of being wasted, damaged or alienated under Order 40 rule 1
The court applied Giella v Cassman Brown and Mrao v First American Bank. It found the procurement process for D388 (C485) had been terminated and that D388 and D1322 were distinct projects under separate procurement processes. The switch followed the gazettement of Lake Olborossat as a protected wetland and consultation with the area Member of Parliament. On the material presented, no apparent infringement of a right calling for rebuttal was demonstrated.
Interlocutory mandatory injunction for disclosure of information
Refused; the Petitioners did not demonstrate special and exceptional circumstances, nor evidence of a request for information that was denied
Relying on Nation Media Group v John Harun Mwau, the court held that a higher standard applies to interlocutory mandatory injunctions, requiring exceptional and special circumstances in the clearest of cases. The Respondent's evidence was that the Petitioners had never specified or sought the information before filing suit, and the Petitioners adduced no evidence of a request and refusal.
Scope of interlocutory stage
At the interlocutory stage the court only determines whether the Applicant deserves the orders sought, not the merits of the petition
The court emphasized that on a motion for interim injunctive relief it is not required to determine the merit of the case, only whether the material presented suffices to show an apparently infringed right calling for an explanation or rebuttal from the opposite party, per the Mrao definition of a prima facie case.
Legal principles established
#- The conditions for granting an interlocutory injunction are those in Giella v Cassman Brown: prima facie case with probability of success, irreparable injury not compensable by damages, and balance of convenience
- The enquiry into whether to grant an interlocutory injunction is sequential; the second condition is addressed only if the first is satisfied
- An interlocutory mandatory injunction requires special and exceptional circumstances and a clear case, a higher standard than a prohibitory injunction
Court orders
#- 1.The Application dated the 25th September 2019 is dismissed with costs to the Respondents
- 2.Parties to comply with the provisions of Order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules within the next 21 days for the hearing of the main Petition
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original constitutional petition jurisdiction; interim relief sought under Order 40 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Peter Thuita Kariuki & 3 others v Kenya Rural Roads Authority [2019] KEELC 163 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Petition (with Notice of Motion dated 25th September 2019). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/163/eng@2019-12-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.