Richard Satia & Partners & Jestimore Simwenyi v Samson Sichangi,Emmanuel Chonge Sichangi, Rasmi Wasilwa Kichoti, Mohammed Wekesa, Tom Sirengo, William Kirwa, Ronald Sichangi, Nick Sichangi, Julius Tirikoi & Davis Barasa (Environment & Land Case 42 of 2015) [2020] KEELC 1098 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The court refused to jail the respondents over an eviction order because the applicants couldn't prove disobedience and hadn't properly served or joined them.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Respondents disobeyed the eviction order of 23rd July, 2014
No - disobedience was not proved to the standard required for a committal sanction
The Respondents asserted they were never evicted and relied on a decree of 17th August, 2007 in Kitale Senior Principal Magistrate Land Case No. 14 of 2003 and status quo orders of 4th December, 2018 in Kitale ELC No. 100 of 2018, over the same subject matter. That deposition was unchallenged. The suit property was the same in the pending Kitale matter, and given the drastic nature of committal to civil jail, the Applicants failed to prove contempt to the required standard.
Whether the 2nd to 10th Respondents were properly enjoined as parties to the suit
The Court doubted whether they had been legally enjoined or notified of the orders, including the eviction order executed on 11th September, 2019
Although the Motion listed ten Respondents, the order sought affected only the 2nd to 10th Respondents, who contended they were not parties to the suit. There was an application of 19th March, 2014 to substitute the 2nd Plaintiff's legal representative, but no application to substitute the deceased 1st Defendant, Samson Sichangi. Enjoining parties is a legal process requiring compliance with laid down provisions, and in their absence the Court had doubts the Respondents were aware of the orders.
Costs of the application
The Applicants, having failed, to pay the Respondents' costs
Having found no merit in the Motion and dismissed it, the Court exercised its ordinary discretion on costs against the unsuccessful Applicants.
Legal principles established
#- Substitution and/or enjoining of parties is a legal process that must be done in accordance with the laid down legal provisions
- Disobedience of a court order must be proved to the requisite standard before a sanction of committal to civil jail can issue
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 21st January, 2020 is dismissed with costs
- 2.The learned Counsel representing the parties should take instructions on whether this matter should be transferred to Kitale Environment and Land Court, where the other matter is pending, to avoid contradicting orders being issued over the same land
- 3.The ruling to be transmitted digitally by the Deputy Registrar to the Counsel on record through their e-mail addresses
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent contempt/execution jurisdiction of the High Court (ELC) to enforce its own eviction order issued 23rd July, 2014 through committal to civil jail
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Richard Satia & Partners & Jestimore Simwenyi v Samson Sichangi,Emmanuel Chonge Sichangi, Rasmi Wasilwa Kichoti, Mohammed Wekesa, Tom Sirengo, William Kirwa, Ronald Sichangi, Nick Sichangi, Julius Tirikoi & Davis Barasa (Environment & Land Case 42 of 2015) [2020] KEELC 1098 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Eldoret ELC No. 42 of 2015 (formerly Kakamega HCCC Suit No. 73 of 1984; consolidated with Eldoret HCCC Suit No. 97 of 1988 and registered as Eldoret HCCC Suit No. 141 of 1991). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/1098/eng@2020-10-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.