Hussein Mohammed Haji v G. N. Kariuki & another [2019] KEELC 594 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kajiado court refused to jail a landowner for contempt, ruling that harvesting hay did not breach a status quo order protecting existing farming use.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the 1st Respondent should be cited for contempt of the status quo order of 16th January, 2018 and committed to civil jail for six months
The application failed; the Applicant did not prove the elements of civil contempt
The court noted that the 1st Respondent was the registered proprietor and that the original interim prayer sought only to restrain transfer, development, disposal or alienation. Apart from photographs of a tractor on the land, the Applicant did not demonstrate which prohibited act the Respondent had done. Harvesting hay was consistent with the possession and farming use existing when the status quo order issued, so no breach was established.
Whether committal to civil jail was an appropriate remedy
Committal would violate Article 24 of the Constitution
The court expressed the view that committing the Respondent to civil jail on the facts would contravene the limitation of rights provision in Article 24 of the Constitution. No committal order was therefore made even if a breach had been found.
Legal principles established
#- Four elements must be proved to establish civil contempt: clear and unambiguous terms of the order binding on the defendant; knowledge or notice of the terms; breach of the terms; and deliberate conduct
- An applicant for committal must prove the elements of civil contempt to a standard higher than in ordinary civil cases
- Continuing ordinary farming activities such as harvesting hay consistent with possession existing when a status quo order was made does not constitute contempt of that order
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 4th March, 2019 is disallowed/not merited
- 2.Costs will be in the cause
- 3.Suit to be set down for hearing
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Act and Sections 4(1)(a), 5, 28, 29 of the Contempt of Court Act; Section 29 of the Environment and Land Court Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Hussein Mohammed Haji v G. N. Kariuki & another [2019] KEELC 594 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in judgment (Notice of Motion dated 4th March, 2019 in a pending suit). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/594/eng@2019-11-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.