Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherNot stated in the excerpt· [2022] KEELC 1022 (KLR)

Leruk Murusi & 15th others v County Government of Marsabit & 3 others [2022] KEELC 1022 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
1 March 2022
PNP.M. Njoroge
2,047 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court has fast-tracked a contempt claim that Kenya Defence Forces officials defied land status quo orders, but no decision has been made yet.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is an ex-parte procedural ruling delivered in chambers at Isiolo by Justice P.M. Njoroge on 1st March 2022 in a contempt application brought under a certificate of urgency. The applicants, represented by Stephen Gambare, seek to cite the Chief of Defence Forces (Gen. Robert K. Kibochi) and the Cabinet Secretary for Defence (Hon. Eugene L. Wamalwa) for contempt of orders issued on 26th May 2021 by Lady Justice L.N. Mbugua maintaining the status quo on disputed community land claimed by Rendille and Samburu communities against occupation by the Kenya Defence Forces. The applicants allege that after the orders the respondents constructed walls, roads and towers, and that the respondents admitted in court on 16th November 2021 and 31st January 2022 that works were ongoing, contending they fall within space already occupied. The applicant seeks committal to civil jail for six months or a fine of Kshs. 200,000, purging of contempt, removal of post-order structures, an undertaking to abstain from further acts, and denial of audience to the respondents pending purging. The court did not determine any of these prayers. It certified the application urgent, directed proper service on the other parties, and scheduled an inter partes hearing for 21st March 2022. The substantive contempt question remains for determination at the inter partes hearing.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether post-order construction within already-occupied space violates an order maintaining status quo

Holding

Identified as the central issue for determination at the inter partes hearing, but not decided at this ex-parte stage

Reasoning

The applicants contend that since the orders of 26th May 2021 the respondents have built brick walls, made roads and dug towers on disputed community land. The respondents maintain the works are within space already occupied and thus not contemptuous. The court did not determine this contested question; it merely certified urgency and directed service and an inter partes hearing.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#

    Court orders

    #
    1. 1.The application is certified urgent and will be heard on priority basis
    2. 2.The application is to be properly served upon the other parties
    3. 3.The application will be heard inter partes on 21st March 2022
    Jurisdiction invoked
    Inherent powers of the court to punish contempt of its orders; application under certificate of urgency arising from petition before the court

    Key timeline

    #

    Practical implications

    #

    Frequently asked questions

    #

    Cite this brief

    #

    Cite this brief

    Caselaw, "Leruk Murusi & 15th others v County Government of Marsabit & 3 others [2022] KEELC 1022 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in the excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/1022/eng@2022-03-01

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