Leruk Murusi & 12 others v County Government of Marsabit & 3 others [2020] KEELC 1711 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court

14 July 2020

LMLucy N. Mbugua

342 words in judgment

View original judgment Read on Kenya Law Watch case

AI-assisted case brief

·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

Kenya's Environment and Land Court at Meru refused interim protection of community land, saying it needed the full facts before granting any conservatory orders.

What this practically means

Executive summary

This is an interim ruling delivered by the Environment and Land Court at Meru on 14 July 2020 in the course of hearing an application dated 24 March 2020. The applicants sought conservatory orders in the interim, contending that the petitioners were challenging the entire process of acquisition of land on the basis that constitutional provisions and the Community Land Act were not followed. The 2nd and 3rd respondents opposed, arguing that no prima facie case had been established, that the petitioners were only challenging public participation, that any error could be remedied by compensation, and that the military was acquiring the land for a public purpose. Applying the principle in Gatirau Peter Munya v Dickson Mwendwa Kithinji that conservatory orders are granted on the inherent merits of a case with regard to public interest and constitutional values, the court held that the matter was at an infancy stage, with the respondents yet to file responses, and that it needed to be seized of the full facts before issuing any orders. It accordingly declined to grant any interim orders. The ruling was delivered electronically pursuant to COVID-19 practice directions, with the parties deemed to have waived compliance with Order 21 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules requiring pronouncement in open court. No costs order was made.

Key legal issues

Whether interim conservatory orders ought to issue

Holding

The court declined to grant conservatory orders because the matter was at an infancy stage and the respondents had yet to file responses, so the court lacked the full factual picture

Reasoning

The court applied the test in Gatirau Peter Munya v Dickson Mwendwa Kithinji that conservatory orders rest on the inherent merits, public interest and constitutional values. Given that respondents were yet to file responses to the substantive application, the court held it needed the full facts of the dispute before issuing any orders, and declined the interim relief.

p. 2

Legal principles established

Conservatory orders are granted on the inherent merits of a case, bearing in mind public interest and constitutional values

Court orders

1.Conservatory orders declined; no orders granted at this interim stage pending hearing of the application dated 24.3.2020

Authorities

Legislation

Constitution of Kenyanot specified
Community Land Actnot specified
Civil Procedure RulesOrder 21 rule 1

Cases cited (1)

Gatirau Peter Munya vs Dickson Mwendwa Kithinji and 2 others
(2014) eKLR

Jurisdiction invoked: Inherent jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court to grant interim conservatory orders pending determination of an application dated 24.3.2020

Key timeline

Practical implications

Frequently asked questions

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Leruk Murusi & 12 others v County Government of Marsabit & 3 others [2020] KEELC 1711 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Not stated in the excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/1711/eng@2020-07-14

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