Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedApplication dated 10.9.2019 (suit number not stated in judgment)· [2019] KEELC 1267 (KLR)

Alexander Barille Abdubah & 17 others v Governor, Marsabit County Government & 2 others [2019] KEELC 1267 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
2 October 2019
LMLucy N. Mbugua
282 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court temporarily blocked changes to Marsabit Municipality's boundaries, keeping the existing boundaries until the land dispute is fully heard.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is an interlocutory ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Meru on an application dated 10.9.2019 that was yet to be prosecuted. The applicant sought a temporary injunction restraining the respondents, their employees, servants, agents and representatives from publishing and/or gazetting in the Kenya Gazette or any other forum a decision to include Karatina Karare Ward and Shegel and Oranderi as part of the Marsabit Municipality pending the hearing and determination of the application. The applicant argued that if the orders were not granted, the respondents would proceed to gazette the municipality boundaries, thereby rendering the application nugatory since the boundary issues were the very matters in contention. The respondents opposed the application, averring that the parties would not be prejudiced in any way and that no irreparable harm would be suffered. The court, through Hon. Lucy N. Mbugua, ELC Judge, weighed the issues raised and observed that the matter was at its infancy stage with the application yet to be determined. It found that the substratum of the suit might be affected if an order to maintain the status quo was not granted. Accordingly, the court allowed prayer 2 of the application dated 10.9.2019, effectively preserving the status quo rather than issuing the injunction exactly as framed, and directed that the matter be heard expeditiously. No costs order was made. The ruling preserves the contested boundary position pending full interlocutory argument.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether to grant an interlocutory injunction restraining gazettement of Marsabit Municipality boundaries

Holding

The court granted prayer 2 of the application, preserving the status quo, rather than the injunction as framed

Reasoning

The judge weighed the issues raised and noted the matter was at an infancy stage with the application yet to be determined. The court was satisfied that the substratum of the suit could be affected if the status quo was not maintained, warranting interim preservation of the position pending full interlocutory argument, coupled with a direction for expeditious hearing.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • At the infancy of a suit, where the substratum of the suit may be affected, the court may preserve the status quo pending interlocutory determination

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Prayer 2 in the application dated 10.9.2019 allowed - effectively an order maintaining the status quo pending hearing and determination of the application
  2. 2.Direction that the matter be heard expeditiously
Jurisdiction invoked
Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court (statutory basis not expressly invoked in the ruling)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Alexander Barille Abdubah & 17 others v Governor, Marsabit County Government & 2 others [2019] KEELC 1267 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Application dated 10.9.2019 (suit number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/1267/eng@2019-10-02

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