Happy Cow Limited & 2 others v Everlyne Chepkirui Milgo & 2 others [2020] KEELC 3340 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nakuru court blocked landowners from selling disputed plots but refused a broader ban on entry, showing injunction orders are only as strong as their wording.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicants established a prima facie case warranting preservation of the suit properties
Yes. Their titles were first in time, the respondents' titles issued much later over smaller plots curved out of an adjacent area, and preservation was necessary pending trial
The court accepted undisputed ownership by both sides but noted the applicants' 99-year leases ran from 1st August 1991 whereas the respondents' issued from 1st October 1996 over plots roughly 0.03 hectares, smaller than the applicants' roughly 0.09 hectares. Whether the disputed area was planned as parking is a matter for trial, but the circumstances persuaded the court that a prima facie case existed and preservation was needed.
Whether damages would be an adequate remedy
No, damages would not adequately compensate in the circumstances
Having found a prima facie case and the need to preserve the suit properties, the court held that monetary compensation could not adequately remedy the deprivation of the disputed parking area and the risk of disposal of the later-issued titles, justifying injunctive relief without proceeding to balance of convenience.
Legal principles established
#- The Giella v Cassman Brown test for interlocutory injunctions is applied sequentially: prima facie case first; if not established, irreparable injury and balance of convenience need no consideration
Court orders
#- 1.A temporary injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants by themselves, their agents or servants from selling, leasing, transferring or disposing of the parcels of land known as Nakuru Municipality Block 23/829, Nakuru Municipality Block 23/830 and Nakuru Municipality Block 23/831 pending hearing and determination of this suit
- 2.Costs of the application to the plaintiffs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction to grant interlocutory injunctions pending trial (interlocutory application under the Civil Procedure regime; no specific constitutional provision cited)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Happy Cow Limited & 2 others v Everlyne Chepkirui Milgo & 2 others [2020] KEELC 3340 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Notice of Motion dated 26th June 2018 (suit re Nakuru Municipality Block 23/543-545). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/3340/eng@2020-03-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.