Kamau & 6 others (Suing on their behalf and on behalf of the residents and home owners of Migaa Integrated Golf Estate) v Sycamore Pine Limited & 2 others; National Environment Management Authority & another (Interested Parties) (Environment & Land Petition E003 of 2021) [2022] KEELC 2762 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court halted a developer's unapproved apartment project and ordered the county to release planning records residents had requested.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Eligibility for conservatory orders
Petitioners established a proper basis for a conservatory order restraining the impugned development
The uncontroverted evidence showed construction of 28 high-rise blocks allegedly without EIA licence or development approvals, in breach of the registered master plan. The respondents were given opportunity to file approvals or licences and filed none. Contentions were uncontroverted, and the court applied the Supreme Court's criteria in Munya, granting the order on the merits and public interest.
Locus standi of the 1st petitioner
Locus standi was established by the uncontroverted deposition that the 1st petitioner was a home owner
Counsel for the 1st respondent asserted from the bar that the 1st petitioner was not a home owner, but the supporting affidavit deposed to home ownership and this was never controverted by replying affidavit. Absent a replying affidavit, the deposition stands, defeating the locus standi objection.
Compelling supply of information by the County Government
A proper basis existed to compel the County Government of Kiambu to supply the information sought in the letter dated 17/2/2021
The County Government objected that the request was addressed to the wrong officer, but the respondent before the court is the County Government itself, not a specific officer. No prejudice was demonstrated. The request - whether a development approval was issued and whether the master plan was revised - was legitimate and reasonable, as physical developments affect the environment.
Section 106B Evidence Act objection
The objection to photographs for want of a Section 106B certificate was without basis
Counsel did not specify which electronic evidence was objected to, and the objection was raised only during oral submissions without any application. Without laying a proper basis, the court could not entertain the objection at the interlocutory stage.
Legal principles established
#- Conservatory orders are granted on the inherent merit of a case, bearing in mind public interest and constitutional values, and are not tied to private-law irreparable harm tests
- Uncontroverted sworn deposition stands; a party wishing to controvert must file a replying affidavit
- An evidentiary objection under Section 106B of the Evidence Act must be properly laid before the court, not raised only in oral submissions
Court orders
#- 1.Conservatory order restraining the 1st respondent from selling, advertising for sale or constructing low-cost apartments on Unit No. CC01, LR No. 29059, Migaa Integrated Golf Estate, pending hearing and determination of the petition (prayer (e))
- 2.Order compelling the 3rd respondent (County Government of Kiambu) to supply the information and documents sought in the petitioners' letter dated 17/2/2021 (prayer (d))
- 3.Costs in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 35, 40, 42 and 47 of the Constitution (constitutional petition; also conservatory jurisdiction)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kamau & 6 others (Suing on their behalf and on behalf of the residents and home owners of Migaa Integrated Golf Estate) v Sycamore Pine Limited & 2 others; National Environment Management Authority & another (Interested Parties) (Environment & Land Petition E003 of 2021) [2022] KEELC 2762 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Petition dated 27/5/2021 (Migaa Integrated Golf Estate petition, Thika). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/2762/eng@2022-07-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.