Alvine Brooks Limited v Geoffrey Kimani Kirunyu [2022] KEELC 835 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court stopped a Thika land seller from evicting or selling land the buyer had fully paid for, pending the full trial.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the plaintiff had established a prima facie case with a probability of success
Yes - the undisputed sale agreement, full payment of the purchase price and clause 7 right to possession gave the plaintiff an equitable interest, and the defendant could not identify a clause permitting unilateral cancellation.
The court found it undisputed that the agreement was executed and that the plaintiff paid the deposit of Kshs 15,000,000 and the balance of Kshs 30,000,000 by 31/12/2021, fully discharging its obligations. Clause 7 allowed the purchaser to take possession within 30 days of paying the deposit without requiring the vendor to hand over possession. The defendant failed to point to any clause of the agreement permitting unilateral cancellation after receiving the full purchase price. The plaintiff thus acquired an equitable interest, satisfying the first Giella limb.
Whether the plaintiff would suffer irreparable injury not compensable in damages
Yes - the suit property is land whose purchase served a specific need that money could not adequately satisfy.
The court accepted counsel's submission that the defendant was intent on evicting the plaintiff from property purchased for a purpose. It reasoned that land is unique and no other piece of land or money would adequately satisfy the need for which the plaintiff bought the property, so damages would not be an adequate remedy, satisfying the second Giella limb.
Whether the balance of convenience favoured the plaintiff
Yes - the plaintiff appeared to have discharged its contractual obligations and taken possession in accordance with clause 7.
Applying the third Giella limb, the court held that the balance of convenience tilted toward the plaintiff, who had paid the full purchase price as agreed and taken possession in tandem with clause 7 of the sale agreement. The defendant's offer to refund the purchase price in instalments did not displace this.
Legal principles established
#- A purchaser who has paid the full purchase price under a sale agreement acquires an equitable interest in the suit property which the vendor cannot unilaterally divest.
- At the interlocutory stage, a court does not make conclusive findings on the substantive issues; those are reserved for trial.
- The Giella v Cassman Brown test governs the grant of interlocutory injunctions: prima facie case with probability of success, irreparable injury not compensable in damages, and balance of convenience.
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion dated 19/1/2022 is granted in terms of prayer (c) - an injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's possession, trespassing on, alienating, charging, transferring, leasing or otherwise dealing with the suit property pending the hearing and determination of the suit, enforceable by the Officer Commanding Station, Thika Police Station
- 2.The plaintiff shall have costs of the application
- 3.If not yet filed and served, the defendant to file and serve a defence within seven (7) days
- 4.Parties to file and exchange their trial bundles within 30 days to facilitate quick disposal of the dispute
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court to grant interlocutory injunctions under the Giella v Cassman Brown criteria (no specific constitutional/statutory provision cited in the ruling)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Alvine Brooks Limited v Geoffrey Kimani Kirunyu [2022] KEELC 835 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in the ruling (notice of motion dated 19/1/2022 filed with the plaint dated 19/1/2022). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/835/eng@2022-03-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.